1. automotive and vehicles
2. boats and watercraft

United States Government Accountability Office
GAO
Report to Congressional Committees
April 2010
ALL-TERRAIN
VEHICLES
How They Are Used,
Crashes, and Sales of
Adult-Sized Vehicles
for Children’s Use
GAO-10-418
April 2010
ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLES
Accountability Integrity Reliability
Highlights
How They Are Used, Crashes, and Sales of AdultSized Vehicles for Children’s Use
Highlights of GAO-10-418, a report to
congressional committees
Why GAO Did This Study
What GAO Found
All-terrain vehicles (ATV), which
are off-road motorized vehicles,
usually with four tires, a straddle
seat for the operator, and
handlebars for steering control,
have become increasingly popular.
However, ATV fatalities and
injuries have increased over the
last decade and are a matter of
concern to the Consumer Product
Safety Commission (Commission),
which oversees ATV safety, and to
others. Many ATV crashes
involving children occur when they
are riding adult-sized ATVs.
Manufacturers and distributors
have agreed to use their best
efforts to prevent their dealers
from selling adult-sized ATVs for
use by children under the age of 16.
ATVs are mainly used for recreation, but are also used in occupations such as
farming and policing. According to a 2008 industry survey of ATV owners, 79
percent use them for recreation and 21 percent use them for work or chores.
ATVs are also used as primary transportation in some remote communities,
such as in parts of Alaska. GAO found little information that quantified the
advantages of ATV use. However, users surveyed in 2008 said that riding
provides them with personal enjoyment, allowing them, for example, to view
nature and spend time with their families. In addition, trail managers and
local business officials in areas of the country where trails have been
established, such as West Virginia, said the surrounding communities have
benefited economically from spending by ATV riders.
The Consumer Product Safety
Improvement Act requires GAO to
report on (1) how ATVs are used
and the advantages of their use and
(2) the nature, extent, and costs of
ATV crashes. GAO addressed these
topics by reviewing ATV use and
crash data and by discussing these
issues with Commission staff,
industry officials, user groups, and
safety stakeholders.
What GAO Recommends
Among other things, GAO
recommends that Commission staff
resume undercover checks of
dealers to check their willingness
to sell adult-sized ATVs to children
and consider how to enhance the
agency’s ability to prevent the sale
of adult-sized ATVs for use by
children. The Commission agreed
with these recommendations.
View GAO-10-418 or key components.
For more information, contact Susan Fleming
at (202) 512-2834 or flemings@gao.gov.
Injuries and fatalities increased substantially during the last decade, but not as
rapidly as the number of ATVs in use, which nearly tripled. According to
Commission staff, an estimated 816 fatalities occurred in 2007— the agency’s
most recent annual estimate—compared with 534 in 1999, a 53 percent
increase. However, from 1999 through 2005—the most recent period for
which fatality estimates are complete—the risk decreased from 1.4 deaths per
10,000 four-wheeled ATVs in use to 1.1 deaths per 10,000 ATVs in use, or 21
percent. Regarding injuries, an estimated 134,900 people were treated in
emergency rooms for ATV-related injuries in 2008, compared with about
81,800 in 1999, a 65 percent increase. However, the estimated risk of an
emergency room-treated injury per 10,000 four-wheeled ATVs in use
decreased from 193 injuries per 10,000 four-wheeled ATVs in use to 129.7
injuries in 2008, or 33 percent. About one-fifth of the deaths and about onethird of the injuries involved children. Crashes involving children frequently
occurred when they rode adult-sized ATVs, which are more difficult for them
to handle. Manufacturers and distributors have agreed to use their best
efforts to prevent their dealers from selling adult-sized ATVs for use by
children, but recent GAO undercover checks of selected dealers in four states
indicated that 7 of 10 were willing to sell an adult-sized ATV for use by
children. Commission staff suspended similar checks in early 2008 because of
higher priorities. Commission staff have estimated that the costs of ATV
injuries and fatalities more than doubled during the last decade from about
$10.7 billion in 1999 to $22.3 billion in 2007 (in 2009 dollars). Safety
stakeholders, including industry officials, said that ATV injuries could be
reduced through training and wearing proper equipment such as helmets.
ATVs Being Used for Recreation, for Medical Transportation, and Farming
Source: GAO; Southeast Region Emergency Services Council, Inc.: (reprinted with permission); National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health.
United States Government Accountability Office
Contents
Letter
1
Background
ATVs Have Recreational, Occupational, and Transportation Uses
ATV Fatalities and Injuries Have Increased Substantially during the
Last Decade When the Number in Use Nearly Tripled
Conclusions
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
20
48
49
50
Appendix I
Scope and Methodology
51
Appendix II
ATV Fatality and Injury Data
53
Appendix III
State ATV Laws
58
Appendix IV
Dealer Rates of Compliance with Age
Recommendations from the Commission Staff’s
Undercover Checks
61
GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
62
Table 1: ATV Requirements for Speed Limits for Youth-Sized ATVs
Table 2: Reported ATV Use by Type of Recreational Activity, 2008
Table 3: Reported Reasons for Riding ATVs, 2008
Table 4: Reported ATV Use for Work or Chores, 2008
Table 5: Number of States with Selected ATV Requirements
Table 6: Estimated and Documented ATV Fatalities, 1999 through
2008
Table 7: Estimated Number of Four-Wheeled ATVs in Use from
1999 through 2008 and ATV Fatalities per 10,000 FourWheeled ATVs in Use, 1999 through 2007
10
12
13
16
39
Appendix V
3
11
Tables
Page i
53
53
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Table 8: ATV Fatalities by State, the District of Columbia, and
Puerto Rico, 1999 through 2008
Table 9: Number and Percentage of ATV Fatalities Involving
Children under 16 Years of Age, 1999 through 2008
Table 10: Estimated Nonfatal ATV-Related Injuries, 1999 through
2008
Table 11: Estimated Risk of Emergency Room-Treated ATV Injury,
1999 through 2008
Table 12: Consumer Product Safety Commission Staff’s Cost
Estimates of ATV Crashes, 1999 through 2008 (in 2009
dollars)
Table 13: Major Provisions of State ATV Laws
Table 14: Dealer Rates of Compliance with ATV Sales Age
Recommendations Checked by Consumer Product Safety
Commission Staff, 1999 through 2007
54
56
56
57
57
58
61
Figures
Figure 1: Youth-Sized, Adult-Sized, and Sport Model ATVs
Figure 2: Estimated Number of Four-Wheeled ATVs in Use, 1999
through 2008
Figure 3: U.S. ATV Sales by Traditional Manufacturers and New
Market Entrants, 2004 through 2008
Figure 4: Examples of Recreational ATV Riding
Figure 5: Hatfield-McCoy Trailhead and Nearby Restaurant
Figure 6: ATVs Used in Farming
Figure 7: ATVs Used by the Military and a Police Department
Figure 8: ATVs Used for Search and Rescue
Figure 9: ATVs Used as a Primary Mode of Transportation
Figure 10: Estimated Number of ATV Fatalities, 1999 through 2007
Figure 11: Estimated Risk of ATV Fatalities per 10,000 FourWheeled ATVs in Use, 1999 through 2007
Figure 12: Estimated Number of Nonfatal ATV-Related Injuries,
1999 through 2008
Figure 13: Estimated Emergency Room-Treated ATV-Related
Injuries Per 10,000 ATVs in Use, 1999 through 2008
Figure 14: Typical ATV Fatality and Injury Scenarios
Figure 15: Total Estimated Costs of ATV Crashes, 1999 through
2007 (in 2009 dollars)
Figure 16: ATV Safety Advertisement
Figure 17: Examples of ATV Warning Labels
Page ii
4
5
7
11
15
17
18
18
19
21
22
25
26
31
33
37
41
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Abbreviations
ATV
Commission
Hatfield-McCoy
all-terrain vehicle
Consumer Product Safety Commission
Hatfield-McCoy Trails
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the
United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety
without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain
copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be
necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page iii
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
United States Government Accountability Office
Washington, DC 20548
April 8, 2010
The Honorable John D. Rockefeller IV
Chairman
The Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison
Ranking Member
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
United States Senate
The Honorable Henry A. Waxman
Chairman
The Honorable Joe Barton
Ranking Member
Committee on Energy and Commerce
House of Representatives
All-terrain vehicles (ATV) have become increasingly popular over the last
decade, with more than 10 million currently in use. ATVs, which are offroad motorized vehicles, usually with four tires, a straddle seat for the
operator, and handlebars for steering control, are primarily used as
recreational vehicles, but are also used for occupations such as police
work and farming. Unfortunately, the numbers of ATV-related fatalities
and injuries have increased with ATV use. According to estimates for the
most recent 4 years available, more than 800 fatalities and about 400,000
injuries have occurred annually. ATV fatalities and injuries, particularly
those involving children, 1 have been a long-standing concern of consumer
safety advocates and the Consumer Product Safety Commission
(Commission), which regulates the vehicles’ safety. In 2008, Congress
enacted the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, 2 which
imposed additional safety requirements on ATV manufacturers and
distributors and enhanced the Commission’s authority to regulate ATV
safety.
1
Regarding ATVs, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (Commission) and the ATV
industry consider children to be under 16 years of age. Commission staff data since 1999
show ATV fatalities involving children who were as young as 1 year old.
2
Pub. L. No. 110-314, § 232, which amended the Consumer Product Safety Act, Pub. L. No.
92-573, as amended (codified at 15 U.S.C. ch. 47).
Page 1
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
The act also directed us to report on the advantages of ATV use and the
incidence of fatalities and injuries. In response, we examined what is
known about (1) how ATVs are used and the advantages of their use and
(2) the nature, extent, and costs of ATV fatalities and injuries. To identify
uses and advantages, we reviewed studies on the uses of these vehicles
and advantages derived from them and interviewed user groups and
industry officials. To research the incidence of fatalities and injuries, we
reviewed ATV fatality and injury data compiled by Commission staff for
1999 through 2008 and interviewed safety stakeholders about the causes of
ATV fatalities and injuries. Because 2005 is the most recent year for which
Commission staff have completed data collection on ATV fatalities and
injuries and because the staff have not yet received complete data on
fatalities for 2006, 2007, and 2008, this report contains the results of
certain analyses of fatalities both for 1999 through 2005 and, when
available, for 2006 through 2008. Based on our discussions with
Commission staff knowledgeable about the data contained in this report,
we determined that the data are sufficiently reliable for the types of
analyses that we performed of trends in ATV fatalities. In addition, to
better understand ATV uses, fatalities, and injuries, we visited areas of the
country where ATVs are widely used (Alaska and West Virginia).
Furthermore, we conducted undercover visits of selected dealers to test
whether they were willing to sell adult-sized ATVs for use by children—a
practice that manufacturers and distributors have agreed they would use
their best efforts to prevent.
During our review, we found that significantly less information was
available on the uses of ATVs and the resulting advantages than on ATV
fatalities and injuries and their associated costs. Therefore, we note that
our report contains more information on the latter. We do not intend for
this to suggest that ATVs’ utility to users is outweighed by costs to
individuals and society arising from that use. Furthermore, because the
Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act did not direct us to, we
generally did not evaluate the Commission’s ATV safety oversight.
However, in examining the incidence of fatalities and injuries involving
children, we reviewed the Commission’s efforts to prevent the sale of
adult-sized ATVs for use by children.
We conducted this performance audit from July 2009 through April 2010 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient,
appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence
obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions
Page 2
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
based on our audit objectives. We conducted our related investigative
work in accordance with standards prescribed by the Council of the
Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. Additional information
about our scope and methodology is contained in appendix I.
Background
ATVs are intended for use on various types of unpaved terrain. They have
large, low-pressure tires; straddle seats; and handlebars for steering
control. 3 ATVs generally are intended for use by a single operator;
however, some models have a seat for an additional passenger. ATVs are
considered to be “rider-active” vehicles—that is, when the operator shifts
his or her body weight, the operation of the vehicle is affected, including
the turning and stability of the vehicle. Although three-wheeled ATVs
originally were produced, nearly all ATVs in use today are four-wheeled
vehicles.
ATVs are available in a number of different models. For example, sport
ATVs are designed for recreational trail riding. Utility ATVs are also
recreational vehicles, but have cargo racks and can be fitted with
attachments, including trailers, and have utility purposes such as doing
chores and for farming. Additionally, ATVs are available in youth-sized and
adult-sized models. (See fig. 1.) Youth-sized models typically have engine
sizes that are typically 90 cubic centimeters or less and weigh less than 300
pounds, while adult-sized models have engine sizes that range from 90
cubic centimeters to 1,000 cubic centimeters and weigh between 300 and
700 pounds. A new “transition” model, which is designed for children who
are 14 years old or older and are under adult supervision, has an engine
size of about 150 cubic centimeters and weighs around 350 pounds.
3
The Commission staff’s definition of ATVs does not include off-road motor vehicles having
steering wheels and either bench or bucket seats (e.g., golf carts, dune buggies,
recreational off-road vehicles, and certain types of utility vehicles).
Page 3
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Figure 1: Youth-Sized, Adult-Sized, and Sport Model ATVs
Youth size (ages 6+)
Adult size (ages 16+)
Sport ATV
(adult size)
Source: Specialty Vehicle Institute of America.
ATVs were first introduced in the 1970s. Sales of the vehicles increased
substantially in the 1980s and more than tripled from 1980 to 1985.
Moreover, according to Commission staff estimates, the number of fourwheeled ATVs in use nearly tripled during the last decade, from about 3.6
million in 1999 to about 10.2 million in 2008, an increase of 183 percent.
(See fig. 2.) However, Commission staff estimates of the number of ATVs
in use do not include information on how often the vehicles are used or
how many miles they are ridden.
Page 4
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Figure 2: Estimated Number of Four-Wheeled ATVs in Use, 1999 through 2008
ATVs in use (in millions)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Year
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
According to a 2008 survey of ATV owners conducted by the Motorcycle
Industry Council, a trade association that represents motorcycle
manufacturers and distributors and works with the Specialty Vehicle
Institute of America, 4 which represents ATV manufacturers and
distributors, nearly 40 percent of ATV riders are younger than 30 years of
age. Although the survey also found that the majority of ATV riders—81
percent—are male, it indicated that the number of female riders had
increased 138 percent since 2000.
The ATV market in the United States has changed in recent years as new
entrants, mainly from China and Taiwan, have gained market share from
the traditional manufacturers in the United States (e.g., Honda, Polaris,
and Yamaha). According to a market research firm 5 that collects data on
U.S. ATV sales, the market share represented by new entrants increased
4
The Specialty Vehicle Institute of America is an industry group that is open to ATV
manufacturers and distributors that have been in business for at least 2 years (not
necessarily in the United States). The group has 11 company members.
5
Power Products Marketing of Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Page 5
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
from 14 percent in 2004 to 42 percent in 2007 before declining to 34
percent in 2008. 6 As shown in figure 3, total U.S. sales of ATVs declined
from about 1.1 million units in 2007 to 689,000 units in 2008, a decrease of
about 400,000 vehicles, which industry officials attributed to the economic
recession. The market research firm also estimated that youth-sized
models represented about 39 percent of all U.S. ATV sales in 2008 and that
the new entrants sold about 83 percent of youth-sized models. According
to the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America, youth-sized models typically
cost between $1,600 and $3,400 and adult-sized models typically cost
between $2,300 and $13,700. A transition model costs between $3,200 and
$3,350. 7 However, we also found some youth-sized ATVs being sold via the
Internet that were priced at less than $500.
6
An official from Power Products Marketing told us these estimates are based on data
collected from ATV manufacturers, dealers, distributors, and component manufacturers.
7
The Specialty Vehicle Institute of America provided these prices, which are based on
voluntary financial reports made yearly by ATV manufacturers to the Motorcycle Industry
Council. An official from the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America told us that not all
manufacturers, such as those from China and Taiwan, report their prices to the Motorcycle
Industry Council. The official also told us he was aware of only one transition model ATV.
Page 6
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Figure 3: U.S. ATV Sales by Traditional Manufacturers and New Market Entrants,
2004 through 2008
Number of ATVs (in thousands)
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Year
Total ATV sales
Traditional manufacturers
New market entrants
Source: Power Products Marketing.
The Commission is an independent federal agency charged with protecting
the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from
thousands of types of consumer products, 8 including ATVs. As part of its
safety oversight responsibilities, the Commission regulates ATV
performance to promote safe design practices and produces an annual
report on fatalities and injuries. 9 Commission staff told us they collect data
on fatalities by reviewing death certificates collected from states, news
reports, and other sources, and investigate, or attempt to investigate, every
ATV fatality by examining official reports. In addition to counting the
8
The Consumer Product Safety Act and the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act
address the safety of products. Products that do not meet safety standards or present
substantial product hazards may be seized or recalled.
9
The Commission staff’s most recent annual report on ATV fatalities and injuries, for 2008,
was released on January 21, 2010.
Page 7
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
number of documented fatalities, because some ATV fatalities are not
reported, 10 Commission staff also estimate the number of fatalities.
Moreover, because ATV fatalities may not be reported immediately, it
normally takes 3 years for Commission staff to receive data on fatalities
for a given year.
In addition to collecting data on fatalities, Commission staff collect data
on injuries from the agency’s National Electronic Injury Surveillance
System, which is a national probability sample of hospitals in the United
States and its territories. According to Commission staff, the agency’s
estimated ATV injury data are current for that reporting year.
The Commission’s work on ATVs began in the mid-1980s in response to
reports of rapidly growing numbers of fatalities and injuries, especially of
those involving children. In 1987, the Commission filed a lawsuit against
five companies that were the major sources of ATVs in the United States at
the time, seeking to end the marketing and sale of three-wheeled ATVs,
among other actions. 11 In its lawsuit, the Commission alleged that ATVs
were an “imminently hazardous consumer product.” In 1988, the
Commission and the ATV manufacturers and distributors 12 settled the
lawsuit through a consent decree that was effective for 10 years. The
decree required manufacturers and distributors to (1) stop selling new
three-wheeled ATVs and repurchase unsold stock from dealer inventory; 13
(2) promote and sell four-wheeled adult-sized ATVs (i.e., those with
engines of more than 90 cubic centimeters) only for the use of riders age
16 and over; (3) promote and sell youth-sized ATVs (i.e., four-wheeled
machines with engines of between 70 and 90 cubic centimeters) only for
10
Some ATV fatalities are never reported. Therefore, as seen in table 6 in appendix II, the
estimated number of fatalities contained in this report during each year from 1999 through
2007 is higher than the number of documented cases.
11
Most ATVs produced at that time were three-wheeled vehicles.
12
The defendants to the lawsuit brought by the Commission did not include firms that
actually manufactured ATVs but did include their affiliates who, among other things,
imported ATVs. For consistency we refer to these firms as “manufacturers” because that
term, as used in federal law in defining the Commission’s jurisdiction and powers, includes,
as a “manufacturer,” any person who manufactures or imports a consumer product. 15
U.S.C. § 2052(a)(11). A “distributor” is defined as any person to whom a consumer product
is delivered or sold for purposes of distribution in commerce, except that such term does
not include a manufacturer or retailer of such product. 15 U.S.C. § 2052(a)(8).
13
Although the decree stopped the production of three-wheeled ATVs, they were not
recalled from the market.
Page 8
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
the use of riders age 12 and older; (4) provide free training to all ATV
purchasers and their immediate families; (5) conduct a nationwide safety
public awareness media campaign; (6) adhere to guidelines for advertising
and promotional materials; (7) include specified warnings on labels and in
owners’ manuals; and (8) to develop a voluntary ATV industry standard. 14
The manufacturers and distributors committed themselves to use their
best efforts to accomplish these undertakings through their retail dealers,
agents, or representatives who sell ATVs. To carry out this commitment,
the manufacturers and distributors subsequently agreed with the
Commission to monitor their dealers, particularly with regard to the age
recommendations, among other things.
After the consent decree expired in 1998, the five ATV manufacturers and
distributors that were part of the settlement and three companies that had
entered the market later agreed to submit voluntary safety action plans to
the Commission describing how they would continue to follow the safety
measures contained in the decree. The consent decree also required the
companies to develop a voluntary industry standard, which would address
the design, configuration, and performance of ATVs. 15 In 2008, Congress
reauthorized the Commission, enacting the Consumer Product Safety
Improvement Act. Among other things, the act (1) required the
Commission to adopt the industry standard, ANSI/SVIA-1-2007, making it a
mandatory consumer product safety standard; 16 (2) effectively banned the
importation and distribution of three-wheeled ATVs; and (3) required
manufacturers and distributors to file action plans with the Commission,
which the agency must approve before those companies’ products may be
sold in the United States. As of March 2010, the Commission had approved
29 of 71 submitted action plans 17 in addition to eight plans of the original
14
The voluntary standard included vehicle performance issues such as configuration
requirements for service and parking brakes, mechanical suspension, stability, and
maximum speed capabilities for youth-sized models. Operator age restrictions were
presented only as recommendations. Under the consent decree, ATVs were required to be
placarded and tagged, placing potential buyers on notice of a number of safety related
matters, including the hazards presented when they are operated by children.
15
The first iteration of the voluntary standard was completed in 1990.
16
On November 14, 2008, the Commission published a final rule adopting the ATV industry
standard, ANSI/SVIA -1-2007, as a mandatory consumer product safety standard, effective
April 13, 2009. 73 Fed. Reg. 67385. Commission staff said they are considering issuing
additional regulations on ATV safety.
17
Commission staff said that some action plans were still being reviewed and that some
companies did not resubmit their plans after Commission staff initially rejected them.
Page 9
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
ATV manufacturers that were submitted prior to August 14, 2008, and were
grandfathered in, according to the statute, for a total of 37 “approved”
plans. Commission staff told us they provide the U.S. Customs and Border
Patrol with the names of manufacturers and distributors with approved
action plans so that companies without approved plans can be barred from
importing their products into the United States.
The mandatory standard defines youth-sized ATVs by their maximum
speeds, rather than by engine size, as under the consent decree. Under the
standard, maximum speed capabilities are provided for four types of
youth-sized models. These capabilities depend on the rider’s age. In
addition, the standard requires that all youth-sized models be equipped
with a speed governor that limits the vehicle to a certain speed but can be
adjusted or removed with the use of a tool or other specialized device so
that vehicle can then go faster. The standard addresses two types of
maximum speed capabilities: (1) when a required speed governor is in use
and (2) when the speed governor is disabled or removed. (See table 1.) For
example, youth models designed for children 6 years of age and older are
limited to a maximum speed of 10 miles per hour when the speed governor
is used and 15 miles per hour when the governor is disabled. The standard
requires manufacturers to deliver ATVs with the speed-limiting devices
adjusted for the respective youth categories.
Table 1: ATV Requirements for Speed Limits for Youth-Sized ATVs
Youth-sized age classification
Maximum limited
speed Maximum unrestricted
capability—
speed capability—
with a speed
without a speed
governor (mph)
governor (mph)
Y-6+: children 6 years old and older
10
15
Y-10+: children 10 years old and older
15
30
Y-12+: children 12 years old and older
15
30
20 and 30
38
Transition: children 14 years old and older
Source: American National Standard for Four Wheel All-Terrain Vehicles (ANSI/SVIA-1-2007).
While federal statutes and regulations primarily address manufacturing,
importing, and design issues involving ATVs, state or local governments
sometimes regulate their use. These regulations typically address issues
such as registration, minimum operating ages, and helmet usage. More
information about state laws on ATV use is provided in the section on
fatalities and injuries of this report.
Page 10
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
ATVs Have
Recreational,
Occupational, and
Transportation Uses
ATVs are primarily used for recreational purposes; however, ATVs are
used for occupations such as farming; for government functions, such as
policing and patrolling public lands; and for transportation in remote
areas. Although we found little information that quantified the uses of
ATVs and the advantages of their use, a survey of owners conducted by the
Motorcycle Industry Council in 2008—according to Commission staff, the
only recent national survey of ATV owners—indicated that 79 percent use
their ATVs recreationally and that the most common recreational activities
were pleasure riding and trail riding. (See fig. 4.) Owners also reported
using their ATVs for other recreational activities such as hunting, camping,
fishing, and racing. (See table 2.) The two types of ATVs available—sport
and utility models—are used for specific recreational purposes. For
example, sport ATVs are used for recreational trail riding and racing, while
utility ATVs are used for activities such as camping because they are
designed with cargo racks and can be fitted with attachments. One dealer
told us that outdoors enthusiasts, such as campers and hunters, use ATVs
because some outdoor areas cannot be reached with other four-wheeldrive vehicles, such as jeeps. He also said that ATVs can be easily towed
and that some are light enough to be placed on a truck bed, allowing them
to be transported to a trail or park and be packed with gear that otherwise
could not be carried.
Figure 4: Examples of Recreational ATV Riding
Sources: GAO; Max Reid (reprinted with permission).
Page 11
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Table 2: Reported ATV Use by Type of Recreational Activity, 2008
Recreational activity
Percentage of respondents
reporting use
Pleasure riding
84
Trail riding
66
Exploring/sightseeing
46
Hunting
40
Camping
25
Fishing
21
Hiking/backpacking
8
Competition/racing
6
Other
7
Source: Motorcycle Industry Council.
In the owners’ survey, owners were asked to rank possible reasons for
riding on a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being “not important” and 10 being
“very important.” Their top responses were having fun, enjoying the
outdoors, and exploring hard to reach places. Owners also said that
relaxation and family activity were important reasons for riding. (See table
3.) Other state-based surveys of ATV riders that we reviewed supported
the results of the nationwide owners’ survey. For example, a 2005 survey
of registered owners in Minnesota found that relaxation, being in a natural
area, and being with friends and family were the most important
advantages of ATV riding. In addition, a 2005 survey of ATV club members
in New York found that riding with family and friends, relaxation, and
viewing the scenery were some of the highest-rated advantages of ATV
riding. 18 Two officials from user groups told us that riding is a family
activity and that ATVs have enabled a broader cross-section of the
population, including older riders, to experience and appreciate the
outdoors. We spoke with the owner of an ATV touring business in Alaska
who told us that the company receives much of their business from
families and travelers arriving on cruise ships who are seeking an easy way
to see the Alaskan countryside.
18
These survey results were published in a January 2006 report that examined ATV riding in
the Tug Hill region of New York.
Page 12
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Table 3: Reported Reasons for Riding ATVs, 2008
Reason for riding
Average score
Fun/recreation
8.7
Enjoy outdoors/nature
8.5
Explore back country/hard-to-reach places
7.7
Relaxation/stress release
7.7
Sense of freedom
7.6
More versatile than other vehicles
7.2
Family activity
7.1
Physical challenge
5.5
Sense of accomplishment/good for self-image
5.4
Utility/business use/household chore
5.4
Fuel economy
4.9
Practical/economical form of transportation
4.8
Source: Motorcycle Industry Council.
Although the owners’ survey indicated that most recreational riding occurs
on private property, ATV trails and riding areas have been designated on
federal, state, and private lands throughout the country. An official from
the National Off-Highway Vehicle Conservation Council, an organization
that promotes the availability of trails for off-highway vehicles, including
ATVs, told us that there are a number of riding locations, especially areas
on private lands that have designated difficulty levels, ranging from ones
designed for beginners to others for riders with more advanced skills. Trail
managers told us that some of these trails have become popular
destinations for groups of riders, particularly for families. For example, a
former Paiute Trail manager told us that the trail has gained popularity
and the number of ATV riders accessing the Paiute Trail in south-central
Utah increased from about 23,700 in 1995 to about 85,000 in 2009, a 259
percent increase. He told us the Paiute Trail provides access to over 700
miles of connected trails. These riding areas host ATV events that attract
enthusiasts from all over the country. For example, the former Paiute trail
manager told us that the number of participants in the Rocky Mountain
Jamboree, an event that includes an ATV parade and guided tours, grew
from 41 in 1993 to over 500 in 2009.
Some studies have shown that spending by ATV riders on items such as
food, lodging, gasoline, and vehicle accessories has had a positive
Page 13
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
economic impact on local communities and has increased state and local
tax revenues. 19 For example, a study on the economic impact of ATVs in
West Virginia, conducted by researchers from Marshall University who
were hired by the Hatfield-McCoy Trails (Hatfield-McCoy), a major trail
system in southern West Virginia, found that the number of ATV-related
businesses in the localities near the trail had increased, causing these
businesses to hire additional employees. 20 In addition, in Minnesota, where
many ATVs are ridden and manufactured, the University of Minnesota
surveyed riders about their spending and asked retailers and
manufacturers to determine the economic impact of all ATV-related
activities. This study found that ATVs have had a positive economic impact
on the state, in terms of both retail sales and job creation. 21 However,
these study findings cannot be generalized to all trails nationwide, and the
studies did not report whether the spending would have occurred for other
recreational activities, if not for ATV use. 22
We visited the Hatfield-McCoy Trails, which, according to officials at a
regional transportation institute, 23 were created and are supported by the
West Virginia state legislature to increase tourism in the state. Hatfield-
19
These studies typically surveyed riders registered in a particular state or collected
information on-site at trails on riders’ personal characteristics, state of residence, typical
number of days on an ATV-related trip, and estimated amount of money spent during the
trip and on related expenses, such as vehicle accessories and storage. Researchers then
used this information to estimate the total economic impact in the area.
20
The Center for Business and Economic Research at Marshall University surveyed
Hatfield-McCoy trail users about their spending and using an economic modeling system
estimated that in 2005 the trails contributed nearly $8 million to the state and local
economy and about $623,000 in state tax revenues.
21
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources analyzed findings from a 2007 University
of Minnesota’s survey of ATV-related spending and found that riders contributed $137.9
million in direct spending in 2007, which resulted in $41.3 million in salaries and $10.5
million in state and local revenues. In 2005, the University of Minnesota estimated the
impact of ATV retail activity and manufacturers and found that they contributed $39.2
million and $165.6 million in salaries and $6.9 million and $30.4 million in state and local
revenues, respectively. These salaries and state and local revenues include the economic
impact that rider spending has on ATV-related businesses, suppliers to those businesses,
and the impact of the spending by employees of ATV-related businesses locally.
22
We chose to discuss the economic impact of studies about trails in Minnesota and West
Virginia in this report because they were done recently and because of the methodologies
used. Several studies also have been conducted on trails in other states.
23
The Nick J. Rahall III Appalachian Transportation Institute provides technical trail
services to Hatfield-McCoy and served as the lead organization for the Marshall University
economic impact study.
Page 14
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
McCoy consists of six distinct trail loops, located in or close to cities in
West Virginia, totaling more than 500 miles. According to the HatfieldMcCoy trail manager, the trail has become increasingly popular among
ATV riders. He said that over 30,000 trail permits were sold in 2009, the
majority of which were sold to people outside the state, compared with
almost 4,000 permits sold in 2000. We spoke with hotel and restaurant
owners in Gilbert, West Virginia, where one of the Hatfield-McCoy
trailheads is located, who said that their businesses are directly supported
by ATV riders visiting the trail. (See fig. 5.) The hotel owner told us that his
hotel, which lodges up to 14 guests, is generally booked weeks in advance.
He also said that finding a place to stay during the annual Trail Fest near
Gilbert is particularly difficult and some of the event participants are
forced to stay an hour outside of the city. The Hatfield-McCoy trail
manager told us that the city of Gilbert supports the ATV trail, recognizing
the importance of the trail to the city’s businesses, and has passed an
ordinance allowing ATV riders to use public roads to access trailheads. 24
Figure 5: Hatfield-McCoy Trailhead and Nearby Restaurant
Source: GAO.
24
The ATV industry recommends against riding these machines on paved roads.
Page 15
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
ATVs Have Various
Occupational Uses and
Advantages
Owners and manufacturers report that ATVs have unique features that
make them advantageous for completing certain work and chore activities.
The owners survey found that ATVs are used for activities such as hauling
or towing, doing yard work, maintaining property, and other tasks. (See
table 4.) Officials from a manufacturer told us that utility ATVs are ideal
for these types of tasks because they are able to maneuver in all types of
terrain, be fitted with a number of different accessories such as snow
plows and winches, and carry about six times more weight and travel
more than eight times faster than a person. An official from the National
Farmers Union, a national farming organization, told us that ATVs were
used on her family’s farm for tasks such as carrying supplies around the
farm, fixing fences, and herding cattle and livestock. One official from the
National 4-H Council told us that 37 percent of their member families own
ATVs for use on their farms. An official from another user group told us
that ATVs can traverse areas such as irrigation ditches that are
inaccessible to other vehicles. Some farmers purchase accessories to
attach to ATVs, such as sprayers that are attached to the back of an ATV to
spray pesticides. (See fig. 6.) Manufacturing officials told us that ATVs are
useful for a number of other occupations. For example, ATVs are used in
oil production, construction workers use them for large roofing jobs,
utility companies use them to maintain power lines, and lifeguards use
them to patrol beaches.
Table 4: Reported ATV Use for Work or Chores, 2008
Work/chore activity
Percentage of respondents
reporting use
Hauling/towing
66
Landscaping/yard work/gardening
58
Property management/maintenance
44
General transportation
35
Farming/ranching
35
Snow plowing
19
Agricultural plowing or spraying
16
Construction/industrial
8
Other
6
Source: Motorcycle Industry Council.
Note: Reflects percentage of responses reporting use of ATVs for work or chores.
Page 16
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Figure 6: ATVs Used in Farming
Sources: Polaris (reprinted with permission); National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
In addition to private-sector users, government agencies, such as the
Census Bureau, the military, land agencies, and police and search-andrescue units use ATVs to carry out their functions. For example:
•
A Census Bureau official said that some census workers use ATVs to
deliver questionnaires to people living in remote areas in states such as
Alaska and Maine.
•
Officials from the U.S. Department of Defense told us that military
personnel use ATVs for base maintenance, carrying heavy gear, and
maneuvering through extreme terrain. (See fig. 7.)
•
Officials at land management agencies, such as the Bureau of Land
Management, U.S. Forest Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife told us they
use ATVs to monitor and inspect public lands. For example, a Bureau of
Land Management official in Alaska told us that between 30 and 40 ATVs
are used for firefighting support, transporting employees and gear,
accessing remote areas, and spraying pesticides.
•
An officer from the San Antonio Police Department told us that the
department uses 12 ATVs to patrol local nature parks. (See fig. 7.) Also, an
Alaska Wildlife Trooper told us that the Alaska Department of Public
Safety has a fleet of 45 ATVs to monitor its lands for illegal hunting and
fishing.
•
Additionally, search-and-rescue officials use ATVs for their missions. For
example, an official from the Southeast Regional Emergency Services
Council in Alaska told us that first responders cannot wait for ambulances
Page 17
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
and are trained to use ATVs to transport victims on a sled attached to the
back of an ATV. (See fig. 8.) She told us that Alaska has a statewide
program that provides funding for about 70 ATVs equipped for
emergencies. We also observed an ATV at a fire station in West Virginia
that was equipped with emergency rescue equipment to help rescuers
reach victims in rugged areas. (See fig. 8.)
Figure 7: ATVs Used by the Military and a Police Department
Sources: U.S. Department of Defense; San Antonio Police Department (reprinted with permission).
Figure 8: ATVs Used for Search and Rescue
Sources: Southeast Region Emergency Services Council, Inc. (reprinted with permission); GAO.
Page 18
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
ATVs Are Used Routinely
for Transportation in
Certain Areas
We also found that people in rural and remote areas use ATVs for
transportation. Thirty-five percent of the owners surveyed in 2008
reported using their ATV for general transportation purposes. (See table
4.) An official from the Alaska Department of Health told us that some
communities in Alaska use ATVs as a primary mode of transportation. For
example, residents of Kotzebue, Alaska, a community we visited, routinely
use ATVs for transportation and subsistence hunting. Community
representatives told us during an interview that ATVs are more convenient
to use than other vehicles because the city has only two paved roads
within the city limits. They told us that the only way to travel by land to
other cities or villages is by using trails developed specifically for ATVs or
snowmobiles. In addition, they said that an ATV is generally less expensive
to operate than a car or truck because it has better gas mileage and is less
expensive to maintain and ship. One Kotzebue police officer told us that
residents use ATVs as their “family car,” commuting to work and school
and running errands. (See fig. 9.)
Figure 9: ATVs Used as a Primary Mode of Transportation
This photo shows a typical ATV used in
Kotzebue, Alaska, that has additional racks
for carrying passengers and other items,
such as groceries.
Source: GAO.
Note: Some ATV owners add equipment to their vehicles that was not provided by the manufacturer.
The photo in the upper right-hand corner shows a rack that has been added.
Page 19
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
ATV Fatalities and
Injuries Have
Increased
Substantially during
the Last Decade When
the Number in Use
Nearly Tripled
ATV fatalities and injuries have increased substantially since 1999, but not
as rapidly as the number of four-wheeled ATVs in use, which nearly
tripled. 25 Commission staff estimated 6,556 fatalities occurred from 1999
through 2007, an average of about 700 people per year. In 2007, the most
recent year for which the Commission staff estimated the number of
fatalities, an estimated 816 fatalities occurred, compared with 534 in 1999,
an increase of 53 percent (an average of about 6 percent per year). As
shown in figure 10, the estimated number of fatalities rose steadily from
1999 through 2005. Although the estimated numbers of fatalities in 2006
(907) and 2007 (816) were less than the number in 2005 (932), Commission
staff said that it is likely that the estimated number of fatalities for 2006
and 2007 will change as the agency collects more information. Hence,
according to Commission staff, it is premature to make any conclusions
about the estimated number of fatalities for those years.
25
Unless indicated otherwise, the Commission staff’s fatality and injury data reported in this
section reflect crashes involving three- or four-wheeled ATVs or an unknown number of
wheels.
Page 20
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Figure 10: Estimated Number of ATV Fatalities, 1999 through 2007
Fatalities
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Year
Estimated ATV fatalities
Preliminary estimated ATV fatalities
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
Note: See table 6 in appendix II for data.
According to Commission staff estimates, from 1999 through 2005—the
most recent period for which fatality estimates are complete—the risk
decreased from 1.4 deaths per 10,000 four-wheeled ATVs in use to 1.1
deaths per 10,000 ATVs in use, or 21 percent. (See fig. 11.) Commission
staff estimated that the risk of death per 10,000 ATVs in use was 1.0 in
2006 and 0.8 in 2007, but said those numbers will change as the agency
collects more information and that it is premature to make any
conclusions about the risk for those years. In addition, as noted earlier, the
Commission staff estimates of the number of ATVs in use do not include
data on how often the vehicles are used or how many miles they are
ridden.
Page 21
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Figure 11: Estimated Risk of ATV Fatalities per 10,000 Four-Wheeled ATVs in Use,
1999 through 2007
Rate
1.5
1
0.5
0
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Year
Preliminary rate
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
Note: See table 7 in appendix II for data.
In addition to estimating the number of fatalities, Commission staff count
the number of ATV fatalities using a variety of sources, including death
certificates, news reports, and information from field staff. For individual
years from 1999 through 2005, the estimated number of fatalities ranged
from 11 percent to 35 percent higher than the number of documented
cases. However, it normally takes Commission staff 3 years to receive data
on fatalities for a given year. Therefore, the number of documented deaths
counted for 2006 through 2008 (832 in 2006, 699 in 2007, and 410 in 2008)
are incomplete and are expected to increase for those years. 26 (See table 6
in app. II for the documented number of fatalities.) By contrast, data on
26
The results of certain analyses contained in this section are based on the Commission
staff’s data on documented ATV fatalities. Because 2005 is the most recent year for which
Commission staff have completed their data collection on fatalities and because the staff
are still collecting data on fatalities for 2006, 2007, and 2008, when available, we report the
analyses of fatalities both for 1999 through 2005 and for 2006 through 2008.
Page 22
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
ATV injuries, presented later in this report, are current for the reporting
year and are not expected to increase.
As discussed earlier, in addition to estimating the number of fatalities,
Commission staff count the number of documented cases, which they use
for various analyses. For example, Commission staff data on documented
fatalities from 1999 through 2008 show that they occurred in all states and
the District of Columbia. 27 From 1999 through 2005, the states with the
most ATV fatalities were Kentucky (240), Texas (213), West Virginia (208),
Pennsylvania (191), and Florida (184). (Table 8 in app. II shows the total
number of fatalities in each state, the District of Columbia, and Puerto
Rico from 1999 through 2005 and preliminary data for 2006 through 2008.)
From 1999 through 2005, 86 percent of ATV fatalities were male and the
average age was 30. The Commission staff’s preliminary data for 2006
through 2008 indicated that 85 percent of fatalities were male and the
average age was 33.
Children under the age of 16 represented about 22 percent of all
documented ATV fatalities from 1999 through 2008. 28 (See table 9 in app.
II.) The annual number of fatalities involving children increased from 1999
through 2004, but declined in 2005. Commission staff counted 163 children
under the age of 16 among documented fatalities in 2005, compared with
90 in 1999, an increase of 81 percent. Preliminary data collected by
Commission staff for 2006 through 2008 reported 143 children among ATV
fatalities in 2006, 124 in 2007, and 74 in 2008.
Commission staff data indicate that children who died were mainly riding
adult-sized ATVs. These data on ATV fatalities involving children that
occurred in 2005 include information on the engine size for 51 percent (84
of 165) of ATVs involved in those crashes. 29 This information can be used
27
The Commission staff’s data on fatalities reflect where the victims died, rather than where
the crashes occurred. However, according to Commission staff, the victims usually died in
the states where the crashes occurred.
28
We did not calculate the risk of fatalities involving children because the Commission
staff’s data on the number of ATVs in use did not indicate the number used by children.
29
Of the 163 documented fatalities involving children in 2005, 51, or 31 percent, involved
children who were 8 years old and younger; 42, or 26 percent, were between 9 and 12 years
old; and 70, or 43 percent, were between 13 and 15 years old.
Page 23
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
to determine whether the ATVs were adult-sized or youth-sized models. 30
Our analysis of those fatalities for which vehicle the engine size was
recorded indicated that about 94 percent of the children who died in 2005
(79 of 84 children for whom the engine size was recorded) were riding
adult-sized ATVs. Preliminary data collected by Commission staff for 2006
through 2008 indicated that 93 percent of children who died (175 of 189
children for whom the ATV engine size was recorded) were riding adultsized ATVs.
Nonfatal Injuries also
Increased during the Last
Decade
The estimated number of nonfatal ATV-related injuries, including those
involving children, also increased from 1999 through 2007, but decreased
in 2008. (See fig. 12.) Commission staff estimated that a total of 413,339
nonfatal injuries occurred in 2008, which was 10 percent less than the
estimated number of injuries in 2007 (457,394), but 70 percent higher than
the estimated number of injuries in 1999 (243,664). The total estimated
number of nonfatal injuries in 2008 included 134,900 that were treated in
emergency rooms, which Commission staff said were the most serious;
209,549 that were treated outside of emergency rooms, but were treated in
other settings such as doctors’ offices and clinics; and 68,890 that were not
treated. 31
30
For our analysis above, we assumed that ATVs with engine sizes of more than 90 cubic
centimeters were adult-sized models, as they were defined in the consent decree. However,
Power Products Marketing, which collected the data on U.S. sales of youth-sized and adultsized ATVs contained in this report, classified adult-sized ATVs as having engine sizes of
more than 150 cubic centimeters. When our analysis includes engine sizes of 125 cubic
centimeters and more as adult-sized vehicles (Commission staff had no category for
recording engine sizes of between 126 and 150 cubic centimeters), 91 percent (76 of 84) of
the children involved in fatalities in 2005 were riding adult-sized ATVs and 87 percent (165
of 189) were riding adult-sized ATVs in 2006 through 2008, according to our analysis of
preliminary data for these years. For ATV crashes involving children from 2006 through
2008, Commission staff had data on engine size for 55 percent (189 of 341) of the ATVs
involved in crashes.
31
Commission staff estimated that the number of ATV injuries that were not treated in
emergency rooms was about 1.5 times the number of injuries that were treated in
emergency rooms and that the number of injuries that were not treated was 20 percent of
the number of all medically treated injuries, i.e., all of those treated in emergency rooms,
doctors’ offices, and medical clinics.
Page 24
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Figure 12: Estimated Number of Nonfatal ATV-Related Injuries, 1999 through 2008
Injuries
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
1999
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Total nonfatal injuries
Treated outside emergency rooms
Emergency room treated
Not treated
Source: Based on data provided by Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
Note: See table 10 in appendix II for data.
In 2008, an estimated 134,900 nonfatal ATV-related injuries were treated in
emergency rooms, compared with 81,800 in 1999, an increase of 65
percent. However, the estimated number of injuries treated in emergency
rooms decreased from 150,800 in 2007 to 134,900 in 2008, or 10 percent.
Commission staff said that although the decrease from 2007 to 2008 is
statistically significant, there is insufficient information to examine what
caused the decrease. According to the staff, the decrease could have been
influenced by one or more of the following factors: (1) exposure, as
evidenced by the number of people who rode ATVs and the amount of
time that was spent riding, considering that recreational activities often
are reduced in times of recession; (2) the state of the ATV market in
particular (i.e., sales decreased dramatically in 2008, likely because of the
economic recession); (3) legislative and regulatory activities (e.g., the
Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, for example, may have led to
a reduction in the availability of imported and youth-sized ATVs beginning
in late 2008 and in a relative increase in the availability of mechanically
Page 25
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
safer vehicles); and (4) information and education activities at both
national and local levels (i.e., increased safety awareness may have led to
increased safety practices while riding ATVs). Furthermore, Commission
staff stressed that the decrease may be limited to one year. However, an
ATV association official said that the increased number of ATVs in use can
account for the increase in injuries before 2008 and that decreased sales in
2008 likely would have had a marginal effect on injuries.
Although the absolute number of injuries increased from 1999 through
2007, as the number of ATVs in use increased, the estimated risk of an
emergency room-treated injury per 10,000 four-wheeled ATVs in use
decreased from 193 injuries per 10,000 four-wheeled ATVs in use in 1999 to
129.7 injuries in 2008, or 33 percent. (See fig. 13.)
Figure 13: Estimated Emergency Room-Treated ATV-Related Injuries Per 10,000
ATVs in Use, 1999 through 2008
Rate
250
200
150
100
50
0
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Year
Injuries
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
Note: See table 11 in app. II for data.
Page 26
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
According to data collected by Commission staff, about one-third of ATVrelated injuries from 1999 through 2008 involved children younger than 16
years of age. 32 Commission staff estimated that 37,700 children were
treated for injuries in emergency rooms in 2008, compared with 27,700 in
1999, an increase of 36 percent, or an average of about 4 percent per year.
(See table 10 in app. II for the estimated numbers of injuries treated in
emergency rooms, including injuries to children; the estimated numbers of
injuries that were treated in other medical settings besides emergency
rooms; and the estimated numbers of injuries that were not medically
treated. 33 ) According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, injuries
sustained by children riding adult-sized ATVs are often very serious,
including severe brain, spinal, abdominal, and complicated orthopedic
injuries.
Public health and medical officials said that injuries are typically bone
fractures, or cranial or spinal injuries. According to Commission staff, an
estimated 27 percent of the injuries treated in emergency rooms in 2008
were diagnosed as contusions and abrasions, 25 percent as fractures, 16
percent as sprains or strains, and 11 percent as lacerations. In addition,
Commission staff data indicated that 87 percent of the people who visited
emergency rooms for treatment of ATV injuries were treated and released,
while 11 percent were treated and admitted or transferred to other
facilities. 34 One nationwide study of ATV fatalities and injuries indicated
that fracture of the lower limb was the most common type of injury. 35
According to a doctor who is an official with the Orthopaedic Trauma
Association, the severity of injuries depends on driving speed, terrain,
riding behavior, helmet usage, and other conditions involved. This doctor
said that injuries often involve multiple traumas that can require long-term
treatment. He said that a broken bone in the leg or foot, for example, can
cause patients to suffer from muscle weakness or arthritis, resulting in a
lifetime of difficulty standing or walking. Moreover, a public health official
32
Similarly, the National Trauma Data Bank, a repository of trauma data from hospitals
administered by the American College of Surgeons, found that 29 percent of ATV injuries in
2008 involved children 16 years of age and younger, compared with 28 percent that the
Commission staff estimated for that year.
33
Commission staff did not estimate the percentage of injuries sustained by children that
were not treated in emergency rooms or were not treated.
34
Information was not provided for the other 2 percent of patients.
35
James Helmkamp, Death and Injury Resulting from ATV and Bicycle Crashes: A FiveYear Comparison of National Prevalence and Cost Estimates among Children and
Adults (Morgantown, W. Va.: October 2007).
Page 27
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
in a state where ATVs are widely used said that the impact of brain injuries
can be considerable, including lifetime medical costs that may be incurred.
Safety Stakeholders
Generally Agreed That
Children Should Not
Operate Adult-Sized ATVs
Safety stakeholders, including Consumer Product Safety Commission,
public health, and industry officials; consumer safety advocates; and
medical professionals we contacted generally said that children should not
operate adult-sized ATVs because they do not have judgment and skill to
handle the power, speed, and weight of these vehicles. Instead, industry
officials said that youth-sized models are more appropriate for children
(except for some larger children) because these models are smaller, less
powerful, slower, and lighter than adult-sized ATVs. An industry
association official also emphasized that adult supervision is an important
part of allowing children to operate ATVs. However, a consumer safety
advocate questioned how adult supervision can occur when the adult may
be some distance from where the child is riding. A 2004 Commission staff
study indicated that if children rode youth-sized ATVs rather than adultsized models, the risk of injury might be reduced by about one-half. 36 Some
public health officials we contacted agreed that injuries involving children
who were riding youth-sized ATVs would be less severe if the children
were riding youth-sized, rather than adult-sized models, because less
energy associated with motion would be released during collisions. An
official representing a major manufacturer said that the industry is
encouraging children to ride appropriately sized ATVs, but parents may be
reluctant to buy youth-sized models because their children will outgrow
them and the parents then will need to buy larger models.
Although we found general agreement among stakeholders that children
should not operate adult-sized vehicles, some consumer safety advocates
and medical professionals we contacted said that children under the age of
16 also should not operate youth-sized models. For example, the American
Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and the American Academy of
Pediatrics have taken the position that children younger than 16 years of
age should not operate ATVs. A doctor who has treated ATV injuries at a
Midwestern children’s hospital trauma center and is a member of the
American Academy of Pediatrics said there is a misimpression that youthsized ATVs are safer than adult-sized vehicles, but that they are still heavy,
motorized vehicles capable of reaching high speeds. He said that the
36
Consumer Product Safety Commission, A Preliminary Evaluation of the Effects of a
Ban of the Sale of Adult-Size ATVs for Use by Children (Bethesda, Md.: November 2004).
Page 28
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
impression that youth-sized ATVs are safer means that more children will
ride them, resulting in more injuries. This doctor added that by nature,
children have less impulse control than adults and are prone to take
increasing risks, seeking greater thrills, which can result in serious
crashes. The doctor explained that crashes involving children typically
occur when ATVs tip over, even at slow speeds, and that victims can
suffocate because they cannot extricate themselves from underneath the
heavy vehicles. However, an industry association official said that crashes
involving children occur mainly when they are riding adult-sized models at
higher speeds without parental supervision. A manufacturing official
added that, unlike adult-sized ATVs, youth-sized models do not have
headlights (to discourage nighttime riding) and have smaller engine sizes
and speed governors.
In addition to concerns about fatalities and injuries involving children,
some safety advocates and researchers said they have become concerned
about the safety of older ATV riders, as the vehicles have become faster
and more powerful. A study of older riders in West Virginia indicated that
older adults are at an increased risk of serious injury associated with ATV
crashes because age-related changes in physical reserve and sensory
limitations, pre-existing medical conditions, and related medication use
may exacerbate the risk of injury. 37 Our analysis showed a slight increase
in the percentage of ATV fatalities of people who were 55 years old or
older during the last decade. From 1999 through 2005, about 12 percent of
all fatalities were 55 years of age or older (an average of 69 people per
year), compared with about 16 percent from 2006 through 2008 (an
average of 103 people per year, based on preliminary data). In addition, the
number of injuries treated in emergency rooms involving people 55 and
older increased from 2,400 in 1999 to 5,800 in 2008, or 142 percent. 38
37
James Helmkamp and Mary Carter, ATV Deaths among Older Adults in West Virginia:
Evidence Suggesting That 60 Is the New 40!, Southern Medical Journal (Birmingham, Ala.:
May 2009).
38
We did not calculate the rate of ATV fatalities involving people 55 years of age or older
because the Commission staff’s data on the number of ATVs in use were not categorized by
that age.
Page 29
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Stakeholders Cited
Numerous Factors
Involved in ATV Fatalities
and Injuries
Safety stakeholders said that ATV fatalities and injuries occur for several
reasons, including reckless driving, speed, alcohol use, riding with
passengers, riding on paved roads, or riding on roads used by other
vehicular traffic. In addition, some consumer safety advocates said that
ATVs are inherently unstable because of their high center of gravity, short
wheel-base, short turning radius, high-powered engines, and weight. A
safety advocate also said that ATV speed governors were not frequently
used and could be easily disabled by youth.
Although more than one hazard pattern may be involved in ATV crashes,
Commission staff data included information on what caused the crashes
for 94 percent of fatalities (3,874 of 4,122) from 1999 through 2005, which
indicated that they occurred when the vehicles involved collided with
objects, such as other vehicles (48 percent); the vehicles tipped or flipped
over (34 percent); drivers or passengers were ejected from the vehicles (11
percent); or the terrain changed (7 percent). 39 For fatalities from 2001
through 2005, our analysis found that 41 percent of drivers had been
drinking or were suspected of drinking alcohol before the crash and that
25 percent of crashes occurred when two or more passengers were riding
the ATV. 40 Our analysis of preliminary data on fatalities from 2006 through
2008 indicated that 41 percent of drivers had been drinking or were
suspected of drinking alcohol before the crash and 24 percent of crashes
occurred when two or more passengers were riding the ATV. For 2005, we
found that in 37 percent of fatalities, the operator had been drinking
alcohol before the crash and that at least one person riding on the vehicle
was not wearing a helmet. 41 Figure 14 illustrates typical fatality and injury
scenarios.
39
The causes for 2 percent of fatalities were for other reasons. Numbers do not total to 100
percent because of rounding. Our analysis of preliminary data on fatalities for 2006 through
2008 indicated that 52 percent occurred when the vehicles collided with objects; 20 percent
when the terrain changed; 19 percent when the vehicles tipped or flipped over; 7 percent
when drivers or passengers were ejected from the vehicles; and 3 percent for other
reasons. Numbers do not total to 100 percent because of rounding.
40
“Drinking alcohol” means the operator consumed alcohol recently before the crash. For
fatalities that occurred from 2001 through 2005, Commission staff data indicated whether
the rider was drinking alcohol before the crash in 67 percent (2,186 of 3,275) of cases and
whether two or more passengers were riding the vehicle in 92 percent (3,010 of 3,275)
cases. Commission staff data were not sufficient data to include figures for 1999 and 2000.
41
Reflects data available on both helmet and alcohol usage for 56 percent (451 of 804)
fatalities in 2005. Data on helmet usage alone are provided later in this report.
Page 30
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Figure 14: Typical ATV Fatality and Injury Scenarios
Going downhill
Going uphill
Going downhill improperly can
cause loss of control or cause
ATVs to flip over. When going
downhill, operators are to shift
their weight to the rear and use
a low gear.
Climbing hills improperly can
cause loss of control or
cause ATVs to overturn.
Opening the throttle
suddenly, for example, can
cause the ATV to flip over
backwards. When going
uphill, operators are to shift
their weight forward, and on
steeper inclines, stand on the
footboards and lean forward
over the handlebars.
Turning
Turning at speeds too fast for the operator’s
skills or for the conditions causes loss of
control, resulting in the ATV tipping over.
When turning, operators are to move forward
and lean into the turn.
Riding with passengers
Most ATVs are designed for a driver only, and the
long seat allows the operator to shift his or her
weight and maneuver adequately. Carrying
passengers on an ATV not designed for them
reduces the operator’s balance and vehicle
control. Children riding as passengers can easily
fall off of ATVs being driven at a high speed.
Striking objects
In many states it is illegal to operate ATVs on
public streets, roads, and highways. Riding on
public roads can result in collisions with other
vehicles. Collisions with other vehicles can
also occur in off-road areas where ATVs cannot
easily be seen. Trees, chains, and
barbed wires are additional collision
hazards for ATV operators.
Source: GAO based on reviews of ATV owners' manuals, ATV Safety Institute training materials, and information provided by
Consumer Product Safety Commission staff and ATV safety advocates.
Officials representing manufacturers disagreed with the argument made by
some safety advocates that ATVs are inherently unsafe. One official, for
example, said that the design of ATVs has improved over time—the
suspension is less tiring on the body and speed-limiting devices are better
and harder to disable. Another manufacturing official said the vehicles’
high center of gravity must be maintained to allow sufficient clearance for
Page 31
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
trail riding. However, two emergency room doctors who have treated ATV
injuries told us that, although the stability of the vehicles could be
improved, they are still dangerous because of the severity of injuries
sustained by energy transfers that occur during crashes. Commission staff
said they are studying the stability issue.
Commission Staff
Estimated Economic Costs
of ATV Crashes over $22
Billion in 2007
Commission staff estimated that the costs of ATV crashes have doubled in
the last decade. (See fig. 15.) For 2007, Commission staff estimated that
the total cost of crashes was $22.3 billion ($17.7 billion in nonfatal injury
costs and $4.6 billion in fatality costs), compared with $10.7 billion in 1999
($7.7 billion in nonfatal injury costs and $3 billion in fatal injury costs), 42
an increase of 108 percent (in 2009 dollars). (See table 11 in app. II for
data.) Commission staff have not yet estimated the number and costs of
fatalities in 2008, but estimated the costs of nonfatal injuries in 2008 to be
$15.6 billion, compared with $17.7 billion in 2007, a 12 percent decrease,
reflecting fewer injuries in 2008 than 2007.
42
Does not total due to rounding.
Page 32
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Figure 15: Total Estimated Costs of ATV Crashes, 1999 through 2007 (in 2009
dollars)
Billions of dollars
25
20
15
10
5
0
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Year
Estimate
Preliminary estimate
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
Note: See table 12 in app. II for data. Includes costs of both fatalities and nonfatal injuries. However,
the cost estimates for 2006 and 2007 are preliminary because the estimated number of ATV fatalities
for those years are not yet final. Commission staff have not yet estimated the cost of ATV fatalities in
2008. We used the Gross Domestic Product Price Index to inflate Commission staff cost estimates to
2009.
In estimating the cost of a death, Commission staff assumed a $5 million
value for a statistical life—a figure they also have used in their regulatory
analyses of other consumer products. Commission staff said they
developed the $5 million figure by reviewing empirical literature that
estimated the value of a statistical life at between $2 million and $10
million and choosing a mid-range estimate. The $5 million estimate
includes the value of work loss and pain and suffering. To develop injury
cost estimates, Commission staff used data from the agency’s National
Page 33
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Electronic Injury Surveillance System 43 —a national probability sample of
hospitals in the United States and its territories—plus estimates of injuries
not treated in hospitals. The injury cost estimate takes into account factors
such as a victim’s age, gender, body part injured, which are used to
estimate the cost of medical and legal expenses, work wages lost, and pain
and suffering.
The Commission staff’s cost estimate of ATV fatalities was similar to that
developed by public health researchers who estimated $4.5 billion in costs
for 2005, 44 compared with the Commission staff’s estimate of $4.7 billion
for the same year. For this study, the researchers identified ATV deaths
from the National Center for Health Statistics Multiple Cause-of-Death
public-access file, which draws data from death certificates, and used the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s method of estimating the
value of a statistical life. Another study indicated that the highest
hospitalization costs were for spinal cord and intracranial injuries. 45 Two
emergency room doctors who have treated children who were ATV crash
victims told us that these injury treatment costs are among the highest
because of the severity of the injuries sustained.
Various Organizations
Offer Training and
Promote Safe Riding
Practices
Safety stakeholders said that the number and severity of ATV injuries
could be reduced through training and by wearing proper equipment such
as helmets. A state trauma director said that parents are usually surprised
when they see the results of crashes involving children because they were
not aware of the dangers of ATV riding. 46 In addition, an injury prevention
43
For the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, patient information is collected
from participating hospitals on emergency visits involving injuries associated with
consumer products. From this sample, the total number of product-related injuries treated
in hospital emergency rooms nationwide is estimated. For more information on the
National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, see GAO, Consumer Product Safety
Commission: Better Data Collection and Assessment of Consumer Information Efforts
Could Help Protect Minority Children, GAO-09-731 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 5, 2009).
44
James Helmkamp, Mary Aitken, and Bruce Lawrence, ATV and Bicycle Deaths and
Associated Costs in the United States, 2000–2005, Public Health Reports (Washington,
D.C.: May-June 2009). The researchers’ cost estimate was in 2005 dollars. The Commission
staff’s cost estimate was in 2004 dollars.
45
James Helmkamp, Death and Injury Resulting from ATV and Bicycle Crashes: A FiveYear Comparison of National Prevalence and Cost Estimates among Children and
Adults (October 2007).
46
An industry official, however, noted that ATVs come with multiple safety warnings, such
as hang tags, labels, and those contained in owner’s manuals.
Page 34
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
official said that in many communities where ATVs are widely used,
people are not aware of the connection between wearing helmets and
preventing brain injuries. According to the Commission, training is
important because operating an ATV seems “deceptively easy.” The
Commission indicated that even at relatively low speeds (20 to 30 miles
per hour), ATVs can take as much skill to operate as an automobile
because the operator requires (1) situational awareness to negotiate
unpaved terrain with both eye-level hazards, such as trees and other ATVs,
and trail-level hazards, such as ditches, rocks, and hidden holes, and (2)
quick judgments relating to steering, speed, and braking as well as relating
to terrain suitability, weight shifting, and other active riding behaviors. 47
Formal, hands-on training teaches operators how the ATV responds in
situations that are typically encountered.
Manufacturers and distributors agree in their action plans to provide
training to ATV buyers. According to Commission staff, manufacturers and
distributors, through their dealers, must offer free, hands-on training to
first-time purchasers and their immediate families, plus incentives valued
at a minimum of $100 for taking the training. As of February 2010,
Commission staff indicated that only the training provided by the Specialty
Vehicle Institute of America’s ATV Safety Institute met the requirement.
The Safety Institute’s course, which takes about 4 to 5½ hours,
encompasses safe riding practices, such as how to operate ATVs on hills
and on various types of terrain; the importance of wearing protective gear;
and the hazards of improperly operating the vehicles. 48 In addition, the 4-H
youth organization awards grants to local communities and schools to
promote ATV safety for children, including hands-on training. 49 The
National Off-Highway Vehicle Conservation Council, an organization that
promotes the recreational use of off-highway vehicles, also offers an
47
According to the Commission, although the greatest risk of injury occurs with
inexperienced riders, training may act as a surrogate for experience. The Commission
found that the risk of suffering injuries requiring treatment in emergency rooms was about
65 percent higher during the first year of riding than during the second year.
48
The industry association had no current data on the percentage of ATV purchasers who
took the training, but indicated that more than 113,000 people took its training from 2007
through 2009. According to a 2004 study conducted by the association, about 7 percent of
purchasers took the training.
49
A Specialty Vehicle Institute official noted that the hands-on training provided through 4H is provided by the institute’s safety training organization. In addition, the official said that
last year the institute launched an online ATV safety education course for elementary and
middle school students that 5,000 people have taken in the first year.
Page 35
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
adventure trail activity book and interactive compact disk that provide
children with information on safe riding practices.
Other organizations also conduct educational campaigns to publicize ATV
risks and encourage safe riding practices. The American Academy of
Orthopaedic Surgeons and the Orthopaedic Trauma Association, for
example, have conducted a public service advertising campaign since 2007
consisting of advertisements displayed in newspapers and airports,
warning people not to think of ATVs as toys and encouraging them to ride
safely. (See fig. 16.) Organization members have also participated in media
tours to promote the campaign and raise safety awareness.
Page 36
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Figure 16: ATV Safety Advertisement
Source: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Reprinted with permission of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.
Page 37
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
State governments are also involved in promoting ATV safety.
Transportation officials in West Virginia, for example, make 30- to 45minute presentations to schools and community groups, emphasizing
safety practices such as wearing a helmet, as part of a safety awareness
program established in 2005. Under state law, all ATV riders under the age
of 18 in West Virginia must wear a helmet and satisfactorily complete a
rider safety awareness course approved by the Commissioner of Motor
Vehicles. A state highway safety official said that to receive certification,
children must watch a 10-minute video and children as young as 5 years
old have received certification. Commission staff also have taken steps to
promote safety awareness through television and radio public service
announcements in areas where crashes occurred, creating a Web site
(www.ATVSafety.gov), and partnering with organizations to promote
safety.
However, despite safety educational and training programs that focus on
the importance of practices such as wearing helmets, rider helmet usage
appears to be low. Our analysis of ATV fatalities that occurred during 2005
indicated that 17 percent of the victims were wearing helmets and at least
83 percent were not wearing them. 50 Similarly, preliminary data on ATV
fatalities from 2006 through 2008 indicated that 18 percent of the victims
were wearing helmets and at least 82 percent were not wearing them. 51 A
consumer safety advocate said that extensive, multiyear educational
efforts on ATV safety are needed to make a positive impact, similar to
those efforts used to educate people about the safety benefits of using seat
belts in automobiles. The consumer safety advocate said that advertising
campaigns promoting ATV safety should be expanded and cited the
success that public service announcements have had in reducing smoking,
but said the effort should be coupled with enforcement. Similarly, a state
public health official told us that injury prevention and safety programs
are not effective alone and must be part of a package that includes laws
with enforcement. West Virginia’s Hatfield-McCoy Trails, for example,
employs law enforcement personnel to enforce riding rules such as
wearing helmets, maintaining reasonable speeds, not consuming alcohol,
50
An industry association official noted that people killed on ATVs may have
disproportionately low rates of helmet usage compared with all ATV operators. The
association had no information on helmet usage by operators as a whole. Commission staff
had information on helmet usage for 78 percent (627 of 804) of fatalities in 2005 and no
data on helmet usage for 22 percent.
51
Commission staff had information on helmet usage for 79 percent (1,531 of 1,941) of ATV
fatalities from 2006 through 2008 and no data for 21 percent.
Page 38
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
and not allowing children to ride adult-sized ATVs. Trails officials said
these rules have been effective in preventing crashes on the trails. They
said that there have been 3 ATV fatalities on the trails since 2000,
compared with 50 to 60 fatalities that have occurred per year throughout
the state, including crashes that occurred on private property where
unsafe riding practices may not be prohibited and where many ATV
crashes occur. Because much ATV riding occurs on federal lands, the
Consumer Federation of America, a consumer safety advocacy group, has
recommended that guidelines for federal lands be developed prohibiting
children from riding adult-sized ATVs; requiring the use of helmets; and
banning riding with passengers, on paved roads, and at night. The
American Academy of Pediatrics, citing research on the effectiveness of
helmet usage by motorcycle and bicycle riders, has also recommended
that the federal government require ATV riders on public lands to wear
helmets.
State Laws on Use Vary by
State
Laws addressing the behavioral aspects of ATV use, such as helmet usage
and training, are generally found at the state level and vary greatly. (See
table 5.) Some state laws apply only to riding on public lands.
Table 5: Number of States with Selected ATV Requirements
Requirement
Number of states
ATV registration or title
36
Minimum operating age
32
Helmet/eye protector
28
Safety education certificate
21
A motor vehicle license
12
Source: Specialty Vehicle Institute of America as of 2009.
Note: Many of these requirements have exceptions and apply only in certain circumstances. See
table 12 in appendix III for more detailed information.
The Specialty Vehicle Institute of America has developed model state
legislation calling for, among other things, hands-on training for operators,
that children under age 16 be under continuous adult supervision while
operating an ATV on public land, and restrictions on the sale of adult-sized
ATVs for use by children.
Page 39
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Manufacturers and
Distributors Have Agreed
Not to Sell Adult-Sized
ATVs for Use by Children,
but We Found That Many
Dealers Will
To sell ATVs in the United States, the Consumer Product Safety
Improvement Act requires manufacturers and distributors to file “ATV
action plans,” which must be approved by the Commission, and to comply
with all provisions of the plans and the ATV industry standard. 52 The
mandatory industry standard also contains provisions pertaining to the use
of ATVs by children, such as requiring manufacturers and distributors to
affix warning labels on ATVs about preventing crashes and identifying the
appropriate (minimum recommended) age for vehicle operators. (See fig.
17.) Sales of ATVs for use by children are covered by provisions in the
plans under which manufacturers and distributors agree to (1) refrain
from recommending, marketing, or selling adult-sized ATVs for use by
children younger than 16 years old and (2) monitor their dealers to check,
using independent investigators, whether dealers are willing to sell adultsized ATVs for use by children and take action against dealers who
disregard the standard’s operator age recommendations. We were told that
many manufacturers and distributors use dealership agreements to
obligate dealers to comply with practices such as not selling adult-sized
ATVs for use by children. 53 Furthermore, some manufacturers require their
dealers to have their customers sign statements at the time of sale
indicating that they have been informed and understand that children
should not operate adult-sized ATVs.
52
15 U.S.C. § 2089. Action plans that were filed prior to August 14, 2008, do not need to be
approved by the Commission.
53
As used throughout this report, a “manufacturer” is any person who manufactures or
imports a consumer product. 15 U.S.C. § 2052(a)(11). A “distributor” is any person to whom
a consumer product is delivered or sold for purposes of distribution in commerce, except
that such term does not include a manufacturer or retailer of such product. 15 U.S.C.
§ 2052(a)(8). A “retailer” or dealer is any person to whom a consumer product is delivered
or sold for purposes of sale or distribution by such person to a consumer. 15 U.S.C.
§ 2052(a)(11). According to the Commission, generally, the largest ATV manufacturers sell
their products through franchised dealers. Importers, who are treated as manufacturers,
typically import ATVs from a foreign manufacturer and market them to retailers, although
some importers sell directly to consumers. In addition, some imported ATVs are sold
directly to consumers through import brokers who never have physical possession of the
vehicles. Some ATVs are offered for sale through the Internet. There is also a substantial
market for used ATVs, with dealers selling both new and used machines.
Page 40
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Figure 17: Examples of ATV Warning Labels
Source: Speciality Vehicle Institute of America. Reproduced with permission of the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America.
Copyright 2008.
Note: The label on the left is for adult-sized ATVs. The label on the right is for ATVs designed to carry
only one person.
A Commission compliance official said that the Commission has the
authority to enforce the terms of ATV action plans. However, there are
several weaknesses in the Commission’s ability to enforce provisions of
the plans aimed at preventing the sale of adult-sized ATVs for use by
children. First, the Commission does not have direct recourse against ATV
Page 41
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
retailers (dealers) under the action plans. 54 The Consumer Product Safety
Improvement Act applies directly only to the manufacturers and
distributors who are responsible for ensuring that their dealers are not
selling adult-sized ATVs for use by children. 55 Although many
manufacturers and distributors use dealership agreements to obligate
dealers not to sell adult-sized ATVs for use by children, the Commission
does not routinely require these agreements to be made available for its
inspection. In addition, these agreements are typically governed by state
law, which the staff indicated can make enforcement difficult because a
number of manufacturers and distributors specify in their action plans that
they will follow their plans only to extent allowed under state law.
Moreover, details about how manufacturers and distributors will use their
“best efforts” to prevent the sale of adult-sized ATVs by their dealers vary
from company to company. Another problem with enforcing the age
recommendations is that many retailers, such as sporting goods stores, sell
a variety of ATV brands and even if one manufacturer discontinues its
arrangement with that seller, the retailer can still sell several other brands.
Finally, most of the action plans are not publicly available, 56 precluding
public examination of companies’ monitoring plans.
Although we found a broad consensus that children who operate adultsized ATVs are at significant risk of serious injury or death, the ages
specified in the industry standard for operating ATVs of various sizes are
only recommended ages, which are reflected in warning labels and hang
tags. Adult-sized ATVs are designed for use by persons who are 16 years of
age or older, and are placarded as such. However, some 15-year-old
children are physically and mentally more mature than typical 16-yearolds; conversely, some 16-year-olds are not as physically or mentally
mature as typical 15-year-olds. The fact that adult-sized ATVs are designed
54
The Commission may be able to pursue penalties against a dealer that knowingly sells an
ATV that does not comply with the ATV standard. According to a Commission official, the
Commission has not pursued such an action against a dealer, but noted that it has only had
the ability to pursue such action since April 2009 when the ATV standard became
mandatory.
55
Manufacturers and distributors may be placed in an awkward position in trying to enforce
their adult use policy. Dealers often sell products manufactured or distributed by multiple
firms. Dealers may play manufacturers and distributors against each other and mitigate the
effect of any one manufacturer’s or distributor’s efforts to enforce sales discipline by
promoting its competitor’s product.
56
The Commission has posted six of the original manufacturers’ safety action plans on its
Web site. Most of the other companies have refused to publicly disclose their action plans.
Page 42
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
for persons who are at least 16 years old does not preclude their safe
operation by some 15-year-olds. 57 Because the age provisions in the ATV
standard are recommendations, there are no specific age requirements
that the Commission could enforce. In addition, the Commission’s major
focus is on ensuring the safety of consumer products when used as they
are designed. Some products are not safe for children; some require a
higher level of mental and physical maturity than young children possess if
they are to be operated safely. These differences are taken into account in
determining whether a product is safe for use by those who are its
intended users. Although the Commission can sometimes act to
discourage unsafe use or products, it has limited ability to prevent product
misuse by purchasers, such as misuse of adult-sized ATVs by children
whose parents disregard the placards, training, and other safety warning
designed to put them on notice that operation of adult-sized ATVs by
children can be unsafe. 58
Industry officials said they are taking actions to prevent the sale of adultsized ATVs for use by children and Commission staff said they have taken
steps to ensure compliance. 59 During our discussions with three major
manufacturers, officials said the companies were monitoring their dealers
and had taken corrective action when dealers were found to have
disregarded the minimum age recommendations. Actions taken were said
to include financial penalties, attempted termination of dealership
agreements, and termination of dealership agreements. Since 1998,
Commission staff have conducted undercover inspections of ATV dealers,
57
Although federal law is not violated by a parent who buys an adult-sized ATV for a child,
this is not to suggest that such behavior might not be an abdication of parental
responsibility under some state laws, at least in some circumstances.
58
The Consumer Product Safety Act and the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act do
not provide a basis for barring the manufacture or importation of a product that is safe
provided that related requirements, such as the filing of any required action plan, are met.
According to Commission staff, it is easier for the Commission to obtain remedial action
against a product that is unsafe when used as designed than when it is unsafe when only
not used as designed. In appropriate instances, however, the Commission may require
placarding and other means of mitigating risk that products will be used in an unsafe
manner.
59
Under the act, the mandatory standard applies only to the importation and distribution in
commerce in the United States of new assembled or unassembled ATVs. 15 U.S.C.
§ 2089(a)(2).
Page 43
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
by posing as buyers, to check compliance with the age recommendations. 60
Nevertheless, compliance rates of the ATV dealers that Commission staff
checked decreased from 85 percent in 1999 to 63 percent in 2007. 61 (See
table 13 in app. IV for annual compliance rates.) A Commission
compliance official said no undercover inspections of dealers had been
conducted since early 2008 because Commission staff were focused on
preparing to implement the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act,
but that inspections will be resumed in the future. According to
Commission staff, the agency expects manufacturers and distributors to
conduct at least 50 undercover checks of their dealers each year.
Manufacturers and distributors with recently approved ATV action plans
are also required to check each of their dealers at least twice a year.
Commission staff indicated that if a dealer is found to have committed
more than one violation, manufacturers and distributors should initiate
terminating their agreements with the dealer.
Examples of interactions with ATV sales staff
by secret shoppers:
• Sales staff at two dealerships said they
were willing to sell adult-sized ATVs for use
by children if the customer returned to the
store the following week and said the
vehicles were for the adult.
• At another dealership, when the secret
shopper said he was purchasing an ATV
for a 13-year-old, the salesperson
immediately said “16-year-old” and then
repeated “16-year-old.”
• A salesperson at a fourth dealership
initially said that he could not sell an
adult-sized ATV for use by a child, but later
asked the customer how much he was
willing to spend and then recommended an
adult-sized vehicle.
• At a dealership that refused to sell an
adult-sized ATV for use by a child, the
salesperson immediately asked the age of
the child, said he would not sell an
adult-sized ATV for use by a child, and
mentioned that he would be subject to
sanctions if he did.
Because Commission staff had not conducted any undercover inspections
of dealers since 2008 and because the number of new entrants in the
marketplace that had not been checked (as of February 2010, 37
companies had ATV action plans authorizing them to sell ATVs in the
United States, compared with 8 companies in 2008), we conducted
undercover operations of selected dealers to check whether dealers were
willing to sell adult-sized ATVs for use by children under the age of 16. In
our undercover checks, we selected a variety of dealers who were selling
ATVs both in stores and through the Internet, including those selling ATVs
manufactured by new market entrants, focusing on dealers located in
some states with the highest numbers of ATV fatalities involving
children. 62 We checked some retailers that exclusively sold a single brand
as well as other retailers, such as sporting goods stores that sold a variety
of brands. We followed the same protocol that Commission staff had used
in their undercover dealer checks and indicated to sales staff that we were
seeking to purchase an ATV for a child who was 12 or 13 years old. We
found that most of the dealers we visited (7 of 10) were willing to sell
60
Commission staff did not select dealers to check on a random, statistical basis. Therefore,
the compliance rates may not be representative of all ATV dealers. Commission staff
focused on checking dealers with a history of noncompliance in states with high rates of
ATV fatalities.
61
To protect the integrity of their investigative work, Commission staff requested that we
not disclose the number of dealers they checked.
62
We visited retailers in Florida, Pennsylvania, Texas, and West Virginia.
Page 44
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
adult-sized ATVs for use by children. In addition to visiting 10 dealers’
stores, we sent e-mails to 6 dealers indicating that we were seeking to
purchase an adult-sized ATV for a child who was 13 or 14 years old. One of
these dealers responded to the e-mail by recommending an adult-sized
ATV; a salesperson from another dealer said she that liked an adult-sized
model, but did not explicitly recommend it for the child; and the other four
dealers did not respond. The dealers who were willing to sell adult-sized
ATVs for use by children included retailers that sold ATVs made by the
traditional manufacturers and new market entrants as well as those that
sold a single brand and a variety of brands. In some cases, sales staff
subtly and in other cases blatantly admitted that they should not be selling
adult-sized ATVs for use by a 13-year-old, but would do so anyway. In
addition, one dealer we visited was selling ATVs manufactured by a
company without an ATV action plan. (See sidebar on previous page for
examples.)
ATV Industry Officials and
Safety Advocates Raised
Additional Safety Issues
During our review, stakeholders raised additional issues involving ATV
safety that Commission staff could explore in carrying out the agency’s
oversight responsibilities. For example, officials from three major
manufacturers said their companies are no longer selling ATVs designed
for children 12 years of age and younger because of restrictions contained
in the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act on manufacturing
children’s products containing lead. One company official said, for
example, there is no evidence that the small lead content in ATV
components presents, or has ever presented, any risk to child operators,
and that having fewer youth-sized ATVs on the market may result in more
children riding adult-sized ATVs, which could result in more crashes. The
Commission has granted a temporary stay of enforcement of lead content
limits for certain metal components of youth-sized ATVs to ensure that
such models remain available, given what it called the “mortal danger”
presented when children 12 years of age and younger use adult-sized
ATVs. 63 However, an official from one manufacturer that has stopped
making ATVs for children 12 years of age and younger said that complying
with the lead requirements under the stay of enforcement is too
burdensome in terms of testing and reporting. A Commission compliance
official acknowledged that complying with the requirements under the
stay of enforcement is burdensome, but said that the agency needs an
63
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Report to Congress Pursuant to the
Statement of Managers Accompanying P.L. 111-117 (Bethesda, Md.: Jan. 15, 2010).
Page 45
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
adequate justification and record of support to provide the stay. An official
from another manufacturer that is still making ATVs for children 12 years
of age and younger said the company is meeting its obligations under the
stay by finding lead-compliant parts and, in some cases, redesigning
vehicles to make some lead-containing parts inaccessible, but is uncertain
whether such youth-model ATVs will be available that meet the
Commission’s interpretation of the law when the stay expires in May 2011.
Also during our review, stakeholders expressed various opinions on how
youth-sized and adult-sized ATVs should be classified. Some safety
advocates objected to the ATV standard’s classification of youth-sized
models by speed, rather than engine size. 64 One consumer advocate, for
example, said that engine size is a better measure because it encompasses
power, vehicle size, and speed, compared with the single dimension of
speed, and that evidence is lacking that children can handle ATVs at the
speeds that the standard allows. Another consumer advocate said that the
standard does not limit ATV size in classifying youth models, which she
said is a factor in roll-over incidents. Moreover, a trail manager said that
children’s height and weight should be considered as well as age in
determining appropriate model sizes for youth. However, a manufacturing
official said that speed is a better classification measure because engine
size does not necessarily determine the top speed. A Commission official
also said an ATV that fits a child’s size may go faster than what someone
his or her age can handle. Furthermore, in 2006, when the Commission
proposed to categorize ATVs by engine size rather than speed, it indicated
that categorizing adult-sized ATVs on the basis of engine size restricted the
vehicles’ design and that engine size does not necessarily limit vehicle size
or regulate maximum unrestricted speed.
Some safety advocates also said that the size, power, and weight of ATVs
are increasing, which they believe has led to more crashes and more
severe injuries. An industry official also said that ATVs are becoming
larger and more powerful. However, Commission staff said they did not
have information that would document whether the size, power, and
weight of ATVs have increased and, if so, whether those changes had
increased the number or severity of injuries. An official from one
manufacturer said the power of sport ATVs and the weight and power of
64
Under the consent decree that the manufacturers were following from 1988 through 1998,
ATVs with engine sizes less than 90 cubic centimeters were considered to be youth-sized
models.
Page 46
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
utility ATVs have increased, but that the injury rate has dropped while
sales have increased during the past 5 years. According to Commission
staff, a 2001 injury and exposure study sponsored by the ATV industry in
consultation with Commission staff showed large increases in the
percentage of ATVs in use with engine sizes of 400 cubic centimeters or
more and the risk associated with that engine size class between 1997 and
2001. Commission staff added that the market has changed since 2001 and
that ATVs with both larger and smaller engine sizes now are now available
on the market, but they have not studied the impact of this market change
on the risk of injury or updated the 2001 study. Commission staff also said
that studying the relationship between the physical characteristics of ATVs
on the market and the risk of injury could be explored in any future
rulemaking. However, they said that given the time and resources needed
to conduct such a study, it would be important to first establish whether
such a study would be useful and necessary for providing information
about trends in injuries and fatalities and would help address the hazards
associated with riding ATVs.
In addition, some industry officials and a consumer safety advocate said
there is a risk of unsafe ATVs being imported into the United States. For
example, in May 2009, the Commission recalled an ATV made by a Chinese
company that did not have an approved action plan and sold for between
$250 to $350. An industry association official also said that it is possible for
a company to have an approved action plan, but not comply with the ATV
standard. A Commission compliance official said that the agency currently
is focusing on enforcing the action plans, rather than the standard, and
that the agency plans to increase testing of ATVs when it opens a new
testing facility next year. In addition, Commission staff said they are
addressing unsafe imports by providing lists of manufacturers and
distributors with approved action plans to U.S. Customs and Border
Protection so that unapproved ATVs will not be imported into the United
States. A Commission compliance official, for example, said that in
October 2009, U.S. Customs and Border Protection seized a container 65 of
Chinese-made ATVs at the port of Houston that was being shipped from a
manufacturer that did not have an approved action plan and therefore was
prohibited from importing its products into the United States.
65
A Consumer Product Safety Commission official could not tell us how many ATVs were in
the container, but said that a container can hold up to 50 ATVs.
Page 47
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Moreover, a Commission compliance official noted that the Consumer
Product Safety Improvement Act gives the agency enhanced authorities
for overseeing ATV safety. This official said, for example, that before the
Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act was enacted, the Commission
was required to determine that unsafe products were defective and a
substantial product hazard, which is a longer and more difficult process
than stopping products from being imported that are unapproved or do not
meet mandatory product safety standards. This official also said that it is
now easier for the Commission to levy civil penalties against ATV
manufacturers and distributors for violating the act, but has not yet done
so. For example, Commission staff said that if manufacturers and
distributors violate their action plans, they are subject to civil penalties of
$100,000 per violation, up to $15 million, and criminal penalties of up to 5
years in prison. In addition, to help educate manufacturers about action
plan and manufacturing requirements, Commission staff have conducted
outreach efforts through public meetings and the Commission’s Web site,
and recently conducted a Chinese-language Webinar for Chinese
manufacturers.
Conclusions
The effect of possible recent increases in ATV size, power, and weight—
which safety advocates and medical professionals say are factors in the
amount of energy released in collisions—on the frequency and severity of
injuries is unknown. It is possible that any increases in size, power, and
weight are too recent to be reflected in the latest fatality and injury data,
which are still being collected. Determining whether such a relationship
exists could help guide the Commission’s future rulemaking on ATV
safety.
Fatalities and injuries involving children have been a significant problem
over the last decade, with children accounting for about one-fifth of
fatalities and one-third of injuries. The Commission staff’s previous
undercover checks to determine whether dealers were willing to sell adultsized ATVs for use by children, as well as our recent checks, indicate that
noncompliance is a persistent problem. Although it may be difficult for the
government, at the local, state, or federal level to determine whether
children are riding adult-sized ATVs, especially on private property,
manufacturers and distributors have agreed in their action plans that they
will not market, advertise, or sell adult-sized ATVs for use by children and
will monitor their dealers’ sales practices. Commission staff could assess
whether manufacturers and distributors are adequately monitoring their
dealers by resuming their undercover checks of dealers and targeting new
market entrants that have not yet been checked.
Page 48
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Given that a substantial number of dealers that the Commission checked
and the majority of dealers that we checked were willing to sell adult-sized
ATVs for use by children, the Commission’s approach to preventing such
sales appears to be relatively ineffective. Allowing the manufacturers and
distributors to use nonspecific and conditional language in their action
plans to describe how they will enforce dealer compliance with the age
recommendations; not requiring manufacturers and distributors to make
dealership agreements available for the Commission’s inspection; and not
making all of the action plans publicly available weaken the Commission’s
ability to enforce provisions of the action plans aimed at preventing the
sale of adult-sized ATVs for use by children. Addressing these problems
could help prevent the sale of adult-sized ATVs for use by children.
Recommendations for
Executive Action
To enhance the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s oversight of ATV
safety, we recommend that the Commission take the following three
actions:
First, when sufficient data are available, assess whether the size, power
and weight of ATVs have increased in recent years and, if so, whether and
how those increases correlate with the severity of injuries. Commission
staff should consider the results of this assessment in the agency’s future
rulemaking on ATV safety issues.
Second, resume undercover checks of ATV dealers, focusing on new
market entrants, which have not been tested, to assess dealers’ willingness
to sell adult-sized ATVs for use by children.
Third, consider how the Commission’s enforcement of the age
recommendations can be strengthened and act accordingly. Options could
include, but are not limited to, requiring ATV manufacturers and
distributors to (1) provide more specific language about how they will
enforce their dealers’ compliance with the age recommendations and (2)
make dealership agreements with dealers available for Commission staff
to inspect how the agreements address the age recommendations. In
addition, the Commission could consider making all of the action plans
publicly available.
Page 49
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Agency Comments
and Our Evaluation
We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Chairman of the
Consumer Product Safety Commission. In response, a Commission official
said that the report presented the information in a clear and wellorganized manner and that the Commission accepts our
recommendations. Commission staff provided some technical comments
and clarifications that we incorporated.
We are sending copies of this report to congressional subcommittees with
responsibilities for consumer product safety; the Director, Office of
Management and Budget; and the Chairman of the Consumer Product
Safety Commission. In addition, this report will be available at no charge
on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or you staff have any questions regarding this report, please contact
me at (202) 512-2834 or flemings@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices
of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last
page of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix V.
Susan A. Fleming
Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues
Page 50
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
For background information on all-terrain vehicles (ATV), we reviewed
descriptive information about the vehicles, including the sales price,
engine size, and weight of various models. In addition, we reviewed the
regulatory and legislative history concerning ATVs, including the
Consumer Product Safety Commission’s (Commission) regulatory
authorities and safety oversight efforts; relevant provisions of the
Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008; 1 and the 1988 consent
decree between the government and ATV manufacturers. To describe
recent changes in the ATV marketplace, we obtained from Power Products
Marketing, a research and consulting firm, U.S. sales data from 2004
through 2008, broken down by sales of youth models and sales made by
traditional and nontraditional (Chinese and Taiwanese) manufacturers.
We also obtained information from Commission staff on the number of
manufacturers and distributors that may legally sell their products in the
United States and estimates of the number of ATVs in use from 1999
through 2008. For demographic information on ATV owners, we reviewed
the results of a nationwide survey that the Motorcycle Industry Council
conducted with the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America in 2008. We
discussed with officials from Power Products Marketing, Commission
staff, and the Specialty Vehicle Institute how their data were collected and
determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for our purposes.
To identify how ATVs are used and the advantages of their use, we
interviewed industry officials, manufacturers, a dealer, and users, such as
advocacy groups, trail managers, and industry groups and government
agencies that use ATVs at work. We also analyzed the results of the
Motorcycle Industry Council’s 2008 survey of ATV owners to determine
the extent to which these vehicles are used for recreation and work and
the reported advantages of ATV riding. We reviewed the methodology used
to conduct the survey and determined that the process was sufficiently
reliable for our purposes. In addition, we reviewed studies conducted
during the last 5 years on the uses of ATVs and the economic impact of
riding on areas surrounding ATV trails. Lastly, we visited Alaska and West
Virginia because ATVs are used widely in these states. To document how
ATVs are used for daily transportation, we visited a remote community in
Alaska and spoke with its community leaders. In West Virginia, we visited
a major ATV trail system and spoke with community business owners to
obtain information on the economic impact of trail riding.
1
Pub. L. No. 110-314, § 232, which amended the Consumer Product Safety Act, Pub. L.
No. 92-573, as amended.
Page 51
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
To identify the nature, extent, and costs of fatalities and injuries, we
reviewed studies conducted during the last 5 years. In addition, we
reviewed ATV fatality and injury data that Commission staff collected for
1999 through 2008, assessed their quality, and identified trends, including
trends involving children, engine size, and helmet usage. We discussed
with Commission staff how they collected the fatality and injury data and
estimated the numbers of fatalities and injuries, and determined that these
data were sufficiently reliable for our purposes. Furthermore, we
interviewed industry officials, user groups, consumer safety advocates,
public health officials, and medical professionals about the causes of ATV
fatalities and injuries and efforts to prevent them, including training and
education. In addition, during our visits to Alaska and West Virginia, we
discussed crash and injury prevention efforts with ATV users and dealers,
public health officials, and other state government officials. Moreover,
because Commission staff had not conducted any undercover inspections
of dealers since 2008 and because the number of new entrants in the
marketplace has recently increased, we conducted undercover checks at
10 dealers’ stores in 4 states and attempted to contact 6 dealers by e-mail
to assess their willingness to sell adult-sized ATVs for use by children. For
our undercover checks, we selected a variety of dealers, focusing on those
selling ATVs manufactured by new market entrants and dealers located in
states with the highest numbers of ATV fatalities involving children, both
in stores and through the Internet. We used the same protocol that
Commission staff had used in their undercover checks.
Page 52
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix II: ATV Fatality and Injury Data
Appendix II: ATV Fatality and Injury Data
This appendix presents various ATV fatality and injury statistics and
estimated associated crash costs.
Table 6: Estimated and Documented ATV Fatalities, 1999 through 2008
Year
Estimated number
Documented number
2008
N/A
410b
2007
a
816
699b
2006
907a
832b
2005
932
804
2004
855
753
2003
762
653
2002
606
548
2001
593
517
2000
551
450
1999
534
397
Total
6,556
6,063
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
a
Commission staff said that it is likely that the estimated number of fatalities for 2006 and 2007 will
change as the agency collects more information. It normally takes Commission staff 3 years to
receive ATV fatality data for a given year.
b
These figures are preliminary and are expected to increase. Commission staff are still collecting data
on documented ATV fatalities for 2006, 2007, and 2008.
Table 7: Estimated Number of Four-Wheeled ATVs in Use from 1999 through 2008
and ATV Fatalities per 10,000 Four-Wheeled ATVs in Use, 1999 through 2007
Year
Estimated number
(in millions)
Estimated deaths per 10,000
four-wheeled ATVs in use
2008
10.2
N/A
2007
9.5
0.8a
2006
8.6
1.0a
2005
7.8
1.1
2004
7.0
1.2
2003
6.3
1.2
2002
5.6
1.0
2001
4.9
1.1
2000
4.2
1.2
1999
3.6
1.4
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
Page 53
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix II: ATV Fatality and Injury Data
a
Based on preliminary data on ATV fatalities: therefore, these rates are not comparable to other
years.
Note: Commission staff said that it is likely that the estimated risk for 2006 and 2007 will change as
the agency collects more information and that it is premature to make any conclusions about the risk
for those years. Commission staff have not yet estimated the number ATV fatalities per 10,000 ATVs
in use for 2008. It normally takes Commission staff 3 years to receive data on ATV fatalities for a
given year.
Table 8: ATV Fatalities by State, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, 1999 through 2008
State
Documented fatalities
from
1999 through 2005
Preliminary documented
number of fatalities
Documented fatalities
involving children under Preliminary documented involving children under
the age of 16 from
the age of 16 from number of fatalities from
2006 through 2008a
1999 through 2005
2006 through 2008a
Alabama
91
30
39
14
Alaska
40
10
24
3
Arizona
69
17
66
15
Arkansas
100
17
34
9
California
178
39
102
13
Colorado
69
15
15
1
Connecticut
18
1
6
0
3
0
1
0
Delaware
District of Columbia
2
2
1
1
Florida
184
51
106
12
Georgia
163
52
44
7
Hawaii
9
1
3
1
Idaho
54
10
27
5
Illinois
88
17
50
7
Indiana
85
22
33
8
Iowa
52
5
18
4
Kansas
50
11
20
6
240
44
111
14
Louisiana
88
33
41
17
Maine
45
4
20
3
Maryland
37
8
16
2
Kentucky
Massachusetts
25
7
8
1
114
22
47
10
Minnesota
98
21
47
7
Mississippi
136
41
57
17
Missouri
116
27
68
14
Montana
30
7
17
1
Michigan
Page 54
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix II: ATV Fatality and Injury Data
State
Documented fatalities
from
1999 through 2005
Preliminary documented
number of fatalities
Documented fatalities
involving children under Preliminary documented involving children under
the age of 16 from
the age of 16 from number of fatalities from
a
2006 through 2008a
1999 through 2005
2006 through 2008
Nebraska
37
9
20
3
Nevada
36
7
14
1
New Hampshire
23
5
1
0
New Jersey
36
6
9
3
New Mexico
45
14
7
1
New York
125
19
55
4
North Carolina
167
49
62
15
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
18
6
17
5
120
30
80
15
70
28
38
9
68
17
40
1
191
40
75
9
Puerto Rico
0
0
0
0
Rhode Island
2
0
2
0
63
20
33
10
South Carolina
South Dakota
25
8
17
1
Tennessee
173
39
74
19
Texas
213
52
85
27
Utah
60
19
25
8
Vermont
17
3
14
1
Virginia
75
19
50
3
Washington
49
8
23
2
208
32
134
8
Wisconsin
93
28
41
3
Wyoming
24
3
4
1
4,122
975
1,941
341
West Virginia
Total
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
a
According to Commission staff, the counts for 2006 through 2008 should not be used for betweenstate comparisons because data are still being collected for those years and data from some states
are more complete for some states than for others.
Page 55
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix II: ATV Fatality and Injury Data
Table 9: Number and Percentage of ATV Fatalities Involving Children under 16
Years of Age, 1999 through 2008
Year
Number of
children killed
Percentage of fatalities
involving children younger
than 16 years old
2008
74a
19a
2007
a
124
16a
2006
143a
17a
2005
163
21
2004
180
24
2003
153
24
2002
133
24
2001
132
26
2000
124
28
1999
90
23
Total
1,316
22
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
a
Numbers reflect documented ATV fatalities. Commission staff are still collecting data on fatalities that
occurred in 2006, 2007, and 2008. Therefore, the numbers for those years are expected to increase.
Table 10: Estimated Nonfatal ATV-Related Injuries, 1999 through 2008
Year
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
Total
Total estimated
nonfatal injuries
413,339
457,394
446,561
414,252
410,142
380,266
340,130
328,264
275,340
243,664
3,709,352
Estimated
nonfatal injuries
Estimated
nonfatal injuries
treated in
emergency treated outside of
rooms emergency rooms
134,900
209,549
150,800
230,362
146,200
225,934
136,600
208,610
135,800
205,985
125,400
191,488
113,700
169,742
110,000
163,553
92,100
137,350
81,800
121,253
1,227,300
1,863,826
Estimated
nonfatal injuries
not treated
68,890
76,232
74,427
69,042
68,357
63,378
56,688
54,711
45,890
40,611
618,226
Estimated
nonfatal Injuries
treated in
emergency rooms
sustained by
children younger
than 16 years old
37,600
40,000
39,100
40,400
44,500
38,600
37,000
34,200
31,900
27,600
370,900
Percentage of
nonfatal injuries
treated in
emergency rooms
sustained by
children younger
than 16 years old
28
27
27
30
33
31
33
31
35
34
30
Source: Based on data provided by Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
Note: Data in table pertain to injuries involving ATVs with three, four, or an unknown number of
wheels.
Page 56
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix II: ATV Fatality and Injury Data
Table 11: Estimated Risk of Emergency Room-Treated ATV Injury, 1999 through
2008
Year
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
Total
Estimated number of injuries treated
in emergency rooms involving
four-wheeled ATVs
131,700
146,500
140,900
130,000
129,500
116,600
104,800
98,200
82,300
68,900
1,149,400
Estimated risk of emergencyroom treated injury per 10,000
four-wheeled ATVs in use
129.7
153.9
163.0
167.2
185.4
186.3
188.5
200.3
197.2
193.0
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
Note: Includes emergency room-treated injuries resulting in fatalities.
Table 12: Consumer Product Safety Commission Staff’s Cost Estimates of ATV
Crashes, 1999 through 2008 (in 2009 dollars)
Dollars in billions
Year
Costs of nonfatal injuries
Costs of fatalities
Total costs
2008
$15.6
N/A
N/A
2007
17.7
a
4.6
22.3a
2006
16.6
5.1a
21.7a
2005
15.9
5.3
21.2
2004
15.3
4.8
20.1
2003
13.0
4.3
17.3
2002
12.3
3.4
15.8
2001
11.9
3.4
15.3
2000
8.5
3.1
11.7
1999
7.7
3.0
10.7
$134.5
b
$156.1
Total
$37.2
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
Note: We used the Gross Domestic Product Price Index to inflate prior years’ cost estimates to 2009
so that comparisons across year could be made on the same basis.
a
Because Commission staff are still collecting data on ATV fatalities for 2006, 2007, and 2008, the
cost estimates for those years are incomplete and are expected to increase.
b
Numbers above do not total because of rounding.
Page 57
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix III: State ATV Laws
Appendix III: State ATV Laws
This appendix provides information on the major provisions of state ATV
laws as reported by the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America. However, in
many cases, the requirements apply only in narrow circumstances,
particularly with respect to requiring motor vehicle licenses to drive ATVs.
See the table notes for more information about the types of exemptions
allowed under these laws.
Table 13: Major Provisions of State ATV Laws
State
Minimum
operator
Registration
age
and titling requirement
may applya may applyb
A motor
vehicle
operator’s
license
may be
requiredc
Safety
education
certificate
may be
requiredd
Helmet/eye
protection
may be
requirede
Alabama
Alaska
14
Arizona
9
Arkansas
9
12
9
California
9
14
Colorado
9
Connecticut
9
12
Delaware
9
12
9
16
9
9
9
9
District of
Columbia
Florida
9
9
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
9
Illinois
9
Indiana
9
14
9
Iowa
9
12
9
Kansas
9
12
9
Kentucky
9
Louisiana
9
Maine
9
10
Maryland
9
12
Massachusetts
9
10
Michigan
9
12
Minnesota
9
10
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
Mississippi
Page 58
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix III: State ATV Laws
State
Minimum
operator
Registration
age
and titling requirement
may applya may applyb
Missouri
9
Montana
9
Nebraska
9
A motor
vehicle
operator’s
license
may be
requiredc
Safety
education
certificate
may be
requiredd
Helmet/eye
protection
may be
e
required
9
16
Nevada
New Hampshire
9
14
New Jersey
9
New Mexico
New York
9
9
14
9
9
9
6
9
9
9
10
9
9
9
9
North Dakota
9
12
9
9
9
Ohio
9
12
9
Oklahoma
9
Oregon
9
16
9
9
Pennsylvania
9
8
9
9
Rhode Island
9
12
9
9
North Carolina
9
8
9
9
9
9
South Carolina
South Dakota
9
Tennessee
9
Texas
9
Utah
9
8
Vermont
9
12
Virginia
9
12
Washington
9
13
West Virginia
9
18
9
9
Wisconsin
9
12
9
9
Wyoming
9
9
14
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
Source: Adapted from a table prepared by the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America (2009).
a
The registration and titling requirements vary by state under different circumstances, such as when
ATVs are operated on public lands, possess a certain engine size, or are purchased after a certain
date. Some states provide exemptions from this requirement for ATVs used in agricultural or other
types of activities or events. While some states require registration with the motor vehicle agency,
others require registration with the recreation management agency.
b
The minimum age requirement varies by state under different circumstances, such as whether the
child is supervised, possesses a safety certificate, is operating an ATV on public lands, or is operating
an ATV with a certain engine size.
Page 59
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix III: State ATV Laws
c
The motor vehicle license requirement varies by state and circumstances. For example, a license
may be required to operate an ATV on public lands or when the operator is under 18 years of age.
Most of these states only require a motor vehicle license for crossing highways. Some states exempt
people from this requirement when the operator possesses a safety certificate.
d
The safety education certificate requirement varies by state and circumstance. For example, a
certificate may be required to operate an ATV on public lands or when the operator is under a certain
age, or the requirement may apply only to first-time buyers. Some states exempt people from this
requirement when the ATV is being operated for agricultural purposes, the operator is being
supervised by an adult with a safety certificate, or the operator possesses a motor vehicle license.
e
The helmet/eye protection requirement varies by state and circumstance. For example, it may apply
only when riding on public lands or when the operator is under a certain age. Some states exempt
people from this requirement when operating an ATV for agricultural purposes.
Page 60
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix IV: Dealer Rates of Compliance with
Age Recommendations from the Commission
Staff’s Undercover Checks
Appendix IV: Dealer Rates of Compliance
with Age Recommendations from the
Commission Staff’s Undercover Checks
Table 14: Dealer Rates of Compliance with ATV Sales Age Recommendations
Checked by Consumer Product Safety Commission Staff, 1999 through 2007
Year
Compliance rate (percent)
2007
63
2006
64
2005
74
2004
70
2003
63
2002
59
2001
72
2000
75
1999
85
Source: Consumer Product Safety Commission staff.
Note: Commission staff did not select ATV dealers to check on a random, statistical basis. Therefore,
the results may not be representative of all dealers’ compliance. Commission staff focused on
checking dealers with a history of disregarding the age recommendations in states with high rates of
fatalities.
Page 61
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff
Acknowledgments
Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff
Acknowledgments
GAO Contact
Susan Fleming (202) 512-2834 or flemings@gao.gov
Staff
Acknowledgments
In addition to the individual named above, James Ratzenberger (Assistant
Director), Anne Dilger, Grant Fleming, Virginia Flores, Tim Guinane,
Matthew Harris, Kenneth Hill, Bob Homan, Bert Japikse, Tara Jayant, Sara
Ann Moessbauer, Josh Ormond, and Dae Park made significant
contributions to this report.
(541060)
Page 62
GAO-10-418 All-Terrain Vehicles
GAO’s Mission
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of
GAO Reports and
Testimony
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, GAO
posts on its Web site newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products,
go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”
Order by Phone
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site,
http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm.
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.
To Report Fraud,
Waste, and Abuse in
Federal Programs
Contact:
Congressional
Relations
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
Washington, DC 20548
Public Affairs
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, DC 20548
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Please Print on Recycled Paper